Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Trams are already on track to change the face of the Capital

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.

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: 08 July 2008
Property investors are snapping up sites to redevelop along the route, particularly at the stops and major interchanges, in anticipation of increasing numbers of passers-by, writes Linda Summerhayes.
YOU'D be forgiven for thinking the only impact Edinburgh's tramline has had on the city so far is to make life difficult for motorists. Drivers in the north-east of the Capital are already well used to cursing the trams as they attempt to avoid roadworks on Leith Walk.

Yet, loathe them or love them, they are starting to shape the city in more than the most obvious way. Although it is still more than two years until the first tram is due to run, savvy commercial property developers are already using them as a template for their investments. Snapping up properties along the route, particularly near the site of tram stops, they realise, can prove to be a canny buy.

"There are already significant developments," says Graham Bell, spokesman for the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce. "The first thing we'll see in areas along the tram route is sites that are unoccupied or sub-standard taken over and that's already happening on Leith Walk and at Haymarket."

It is the major interchanges that have got the property developers most excited – Shandwick Place and Haymarket at the West End, as well as Elm Row and Picardy Place further east.

Tens of millions have been spent, or are about to be spent, transforming what were unremarkable properties into fashionable hotels, clubs and shops.

But there is also huge potential to the west of the city, as the link between the city centre and Edinburgh Airport takes in commercial sites at Ingliston, Gogarburn and Edinburgh Park. At Gogarburn, next to the Royal Bank of Scotland headquarters, the city council is using the promise of trams as a carrot to try to lure international companies to the area.

The tram line also takes in the Gyle shopping complex and its owners have said they plan to capitalise on the tram route with an expansion.

The pattern also continues in the East End and the tram stop, or transport interchange, at Elm Row was described as a "major factor" in the Fitzpatrick Hotel Group's decision to launch a new venture there.

Leading leisure tycoon Stefan King has already bought up property opposite the tram stop at Picardy Place where his nightspot GHQ opened last year.

And not one to miss a trick, he also recently snapped up a former casino at the West End, near another tram stop, as well as the Rutland Hotel.

Cameron Stott, director of commercial property experts Jones Lang LaSalle, says: "I think the trams are already starting to shape the city, especially around the transport interchanges.

"Around Edinburgh Park and also Haymarket and Waverley stations, where the trams will be converging with rail and bus routes as well, these are primary locations."

What's getting the developers excited is the possibility of making money because more people from further afield are visiting these areas. The success other cities have tasted is also adding to the buzz – Dublin's main shopping street reported a 25 per cent increase in trade after trams were introduced.

While the commercial hotspots around the tram stops, such as at the former Morrison Street goods yard, have already been snapped up, there are still sites ripe with potential along the length of the tram route.

"I think other developments will follow once people have a better understanding of the tram routes," says Mr Stott.

"The influence at points along the line of the tram is probably not really going to be felt significantly until it's up and running. That's when people will start to see pedestrian flows and where residential areas become more attractive because of the influence of the tram halts."

It is here where local businesses will thrive – as long as the areas around the tram stops are redeveloped so pavement cafes, small shops and market stalls can thrive. This is the vision of Edinburgh's design champion Sir Terry Farrell, who believes the city cannot be truly improved by the trams unless the public areas around the line are attractive.

Michael Apter, owner of the Paper Tiger stationery and gift outlet and chairman of the West End Association, agrees and says businesses are already thinking about how to make the most of the opportunity.

It is the aim of the association to promote the area between Queensferry Street and Manor Place as a community and they have branded their area as the West End Village.

"The tram stops are going to be delivering thousands of people to the city centre every day and it's inevitable the tram stops will become more of a hub," adds Mr Apter.

"Shandwick Place is already a big, big interchange and the trams will strengthen that hub in the city centre and reinforce the identity of the area."

Small traders along the route are of course more than aware of the construction work for the tramline.

As their businesses suffer because traffic and pedestrians are diverted away from them, the promise of future riches is no panacea.

However, the tram route has inspired new possibilities of huge investment in some parts of the city.

What is already clear is that Edinburgh's trams are going to change the landscape of the city in many more ways than simply bringing overhead cables and metal tracks back to the streets.


The full article contains 917 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Rv2!,

08/07/2008 11:22:56
Let's get it right,
Trams have already ruined Edinburgh.
2

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 11:42:46
#1, you're right. It's very sad.
3

Capital Boy,

08/07/2008 12:03:15
#1+2 yer free to leave anytime !!
4

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:07:36
"Trams are already on track to change the face of the Capital"


...for the worst.
5

,

08/07/2008 12:10:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

,

08/07/2008 12:12:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

Optimus Prime,

Cybertron 08/07/2008 12:14:39
BUILD IT AND PEOPLE WILL COME........
8

Hibernia,

08/07/2008 12:16:21
#6 there are lot of people that dont like and they either A) cant get into Edinburgh because of all the roadworks not just the trams or B) spend ages follwing the diversions signs trying to get out and just get lost
9

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:18:22
#7:

...and then they will see all the rows of empty properties that used to br thriving businesses, realise they can't drive or park anywhere and if they are not going from somewhere on a tram route, to somewhere on a tram route, it will take them ages, plus loads of faffing about to get there.

Then they will leave, never to return.
10

Liz,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:19:56
#6
Yes, excellent for anyone wanting to go from Ocean Terminal to the Gyle. For the rest of us we will end up paying for it when the bus services to anywhere else in the city are cut back to pay for the damned things.
11

,

08/07/2008 12:20:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

foz,

In his recession proof suit 08/07/2008 12:26:11
What a piece of propaganda rubbish. Most of the residents in Edinburgh have a brain. When you read tosh like this you feel like your living in some sort of communist timewarp in 1975. But then this is Scotland.
13

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:29:09
#1 and #4 hit the nail on the head.

The article, while bleating away about how trams the will be so good for millionaire investors, fails to mention the scores of hard working local people who's businesses are being systematically bled dry by this disgraceful project.

The perpetrators of this insane scheme will stop at nothing in order to try and fool people with their spin and lies into thinking that this tram line is actually worth the ridiculous sums of money being spent on it.

Well they can't fool me.
14

David55,

London 08/07/2008 12:34:56
The trams will be an excellent addition to the public transport in the city. I would imagine that people who have houses close to tram stops will benefit as they see the value of their properties rise.

I only wish that the Edinburgh Airport Rail Link has got the go ahead too.

15

James (1),

08/07/2008 12:36:21
Look they poo poo'd the Scottish Parliament as a waste of money in the beginning. We have gotten over it. So why not apply the same logic? It does not need to improve anything. Just keep spending the money.
Like #3 says you can always leave. Just like the businesses and shopping public that are doing just that.
People are creatures of habit. If they can park and shop elsewhere for free they will continue to do so.
Getting them to return will be the hard thing.
If you owned a shop would you open it in the centre of town?
16

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:42:04
#16 The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

"Your Dog plays the Castanets."

Mario, he only plays the Castanets during the mating season.

17

,

08/07/2008 12:46:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

20something,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:49:13
This is great news! More investment. Be happy people.
19

Bob 2,

08/07/2008 12:49:47
no 13 Euan

so property prices will go even Higher, Isn't part of the current problem in the housing and lending market.

Pricing "locals" out of the local market

1st time buyers will be a rare bread shorlty.

You can here it on one of those many Home Programmes, thie 2 Cupboard flat is only £250,000

20

David55,

London 08/07/2008 12:50:49
#17 I agree. It will be sad to see the giant bus park (Princes Street) go but that's progress for you.
21

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:52:09
I'm perfectly cheery thanks Mario and I'm certainly not afraid of change.

Thing is, when 'change', as you put it, swallows up £600 million+ of valuable taxpayers money for little or no return that makes me angry, not miserable.

Just for the record, I think your mother probably worked her way around Britain's funfair circuit for a few years.

And your father...
22

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:53:15
Mario (17) - I don't follow your logic. How does jeopardising Lothian Buses' services and ability to attract new customers be "the beginning of a decent transport system"?

The tram is expected to serve 6% of Edinburgh's population and is heavily reliant on the Waterfront development for passengers. With the current economic situation, this development has not only stalled but I understand repossessions there have dramatically increased over recent weeks.

Any delay in the development will be at the expense of Lothian Buses who will take steps to shore up the losses, either by reducing services and/or frequencies and/or increasing ticket prices. How can this be a good thing for public transport? Why do you think that increased public transport fares and reduced services will actually attract public transport usage?

23

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 12:55:44
David (22) - What makes you think that the tram is going to replace buses on Princes Street to any discernible extent?

This is another piece of misinformation but is not substantiated by Lothian Buses themselves. Go and ask them.

24

Curious Yellow,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:00:14
#3 and others - "you can always leave." How very grown up. There are many people living outwith the city who work in the centre. It is already difficult enough to find reasonable parking, and the additional road works - not just those linked to the trams, because they are everywhere - are making it more and more difficult. When big name companies run by big walleted executives can't get their staff and/or their clients into their big offices in the city centre, they'll take them elsewhere. Big, multi-nationals leaving lock stock and barrell and re-locating to a town/city that wants them to be there. We already have large shopping malls outside the centre, and that is bleeding the smaller city centre stores dry. No-one can get to them to do their shopping, so they too will go elsewhere. The trams will do absolutely nothing for the benefit of edinburgh or its people. #17 talks about "the beginnings of a decent transport system" - you think it's bad now? Just wait.........
25

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:04:00
David(22)

The 'bus park' as you put it will still be there.

Just how exactly is someone who wishes to go from say Bruntsfield to their work on the other side of town and who uses the #11 bus going to benefit from the trams?

The #11 will continue to use Princes St together with every other bus which currently uses it as part of their route.

It is a total myth that the trams will reduce traffic on Princes St, a total myth.

26

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:05:05
#24 Sarah B

"The tram is expected to serve 6% of Edinburgh's population and is heavily reliant on the Waterfront development for passengers."

Sarah, I am sure you are right, however, the trams won't get much business from the Waterfront's inhabitants, as these will almost certainly be the BMW/Merc brigade who won't use public transport (ever).

That leaves Leith Walk, Princes Street, ect as passenger pickup points, but so few stopping places exist along the whole track that I doubt they will gather many passengers from other sources along the route.

This project is destined to become a big white elephant and I personally cannot wait for it to fail.

27

20something,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:07:47
This is so over the top. They're trams! An addition and improvement to our public transport network.

17 - "you think it's bad now? Just wait........."

Wait for what? The trams aren't going to grab you by the feet and drag you into the Forth, are they?

Get over it!
28

20something,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:08:52
17 = 26 in case you didn't know.

Lalala.
29

,

08/07/2008 13:16:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:21:38
Mario (32) - Actually, I appear to be one of the very few contributors on tram articles who has actually bothered to read the supporting documentation to the scheme and I am afraid I still do not see how decreasing bus services/frequencies and increasing fares on buses and trams will improve public transport usage (I have yet to meet anyone involved in the transport industry who believes this to be the key to increasing public transport usage). Being the "fools" that you think we are, I would obviously appreciate the benefit of your superior expertise and a proper answer.

Unfortunately, my source for the rise in repossessions is a local surveyor involved in that area. However, I am sure you read the Scotland on Sunday article two weeks ago discussing the downturn in Waterfront developments in the UK and citing the case of the Waterfront Edinburgh properties which recently went to auction and sold for a fraction of the price of a similar new property in the same place.
31

,

08/07/2008 13:29:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
32

I love to eat Sellotape,

08/07/2008 13:30:39
"The trams aren't going to grab you by the feet and drag you into the Forth, are they?"

Well, that would be kind of nice.

33

David55,

London 08/07/2008 13:32:42
If the giant bus park on Princes Street is still going to be there, that will be disappointing.
The council really need to sort that out. Before the council stopped cars entering Princes Street,
the cars broke up the buses. Now a giant bus park develops. On my last trip on a bus, the guy across
from me was meowing, in between shouting at the top of his voice "I need ma methodone!". That wasn't
a particularly pleasant journey. If the tram gets me along Princes Street more quickly, i'm all for it.
34

Bob 2,

08/07/2008 13:34:57
28 The Genuine Mario Antoinette,..... There are no big multinationals in the middle of edinburgh. Microsoft just committed knowing fine well the tram work was coming

MICROSOFT... Micro who ?, aren't they one of the BIGGEST MULTINATIONALS in the WORLD.

But you are right, everyone has moved to the West of Edinburgh...with logically all the Housing being built in North Leith.....the other side of Town.... Common Sense never prevails in Edinburgh.. Forward Planning or what !
35

David55,

London 08/07/2008 13:35:55
If the complaints about roadworks are to be believed the tram system works should be leading to increased public transport usage (trains, buses) now. Therefore the trams are already doing their job of getting people out their cars and they aren't even in service yet.
36

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:36:03
Mario (38) - if you do not read the minutiae, then how can you be so confident in your support of the scheme?

What is worrying about the Edinburgh tram project is that it is, to my knowledge, the only one in the UK to have used the city's major bus service provider as a kind of guarantor and to have expected that bus company to mop up the losses sustained by the trams.

In continuing to support the tram scheme, in the face of unhealthy and uncertain economic forecasts, is to support the consequent likely downturn in Lothian Buses' business and public transport usage in Edinburgh but, of course, you would only know that if you read the minutiae.
37

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:36:18
#38, Mario

Come on Man, don't contradict yourself, you LOVE tram whingeing just as much as the next person.

It's just that you conveniently seem to forget which side you're on all the time.

You know full well Sarah B's comments are probably the most constructive and informative of any person who posts on the trams.

And I bet you secretly know that this tram line is fast turning into Scotland's national disgrace as well.




38

Bob 2,

08/07/2008 13:36:22
david 55

nice to see the old car driver reply, Car drivers never see themselves as part of the congestion, just everyone else !
39

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:41:25
David (43) - As far as buses getting you along Princes Street quicker is concerned, that remains to be seen.

It was previously stated that the business case for the tram required that it be segregated from other road traffic and given priority at junctions. However, I understand from TIE that, where roads are too narrow, the tram will have to share roadspace with the buses (as it would have required the narrowing of pavements on Princes Street). Quite where that leaves the business case, I do not know but then that does not seem to matter much.
40

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:43:16
Euan (47) - Thank you.
41

,

08/07/2008 13:43:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
42

David55,

London 08/07/2008 13:46:02
Bob 2 - My car is sitting rusting in a car park. I get the train, tube or bus in London. When I come back to Edinburgh, I'll probably return to using a car to get around as the public transport in Edinburgh is poor in relation to London (although, it's good in relation to the rest of Scotland).

I do recall that the roadworks were a major pain in Edinburgh and that was before the tram works started. However, it's hard to build anything in a city centre without a bit of disruption.
43

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:50:19
#51

Another classic example of comparing Edinburgh to 'every other European city', a comparison which is completely incorrect.

The layout of Edinburgh is completely unsuitable to accommodate a tram network as well as all the other vehicles which use the roads in this City every day.

So the 'facts' you talk about are complete nonsense.


44

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:53:31
Foo (46) - You are quite correct. I can't know what will happen in the future. However, I can ask what provisions have been made to safeguard buses in Edinburgh and to be appalled to discover that there are none.

Likewise, you cannot know that I am not right and whilst I am quite happy to discuss the relative differences in designing, promoting and financing European tram schemes in Europe and the UK, I am not sure that your mind is sufficiently open to learn from the debate.

You think a tramline to a property development that is not yet build is "progress". I see it as a risk to our very successful bus company and do not regard that as progress. It seems we shall have to agree to disagree.



45

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:55:09
My motivation Mario is to see public money spent wisely and correctly, not poured down the drain in order to satisfy the twisted visions of certain councillors.

And your talk of investment on the tram line just now pales into insignificance when we are seeing long-running local businesses being forced to close their doors due to a lack of trade as a direct result of the construction of the tram line.

This to me is the most insulting aspect of the trams, and something that no-one seems to give a damn about.


46

David55,

London 08/07/2008 13:55:19
#55 I believe that Edinburgh has already accommodated a tram network in the not so distant past. So hopefully Edinburgh can accommodate this new system too.
47

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:55:56
Oooohhh, getting the insults going again Mario, tut tut..
48

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:57:14
Mario (54) - And you think your comments are constructive? You admit that you have no detailed knowledge of the project and you seem to prefer to argue by insulting people and questioning their motives.

My motive is to protect the bus service upon which the vast majority of residents rely. What's yours?
49

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 13:59:58
#64

Thats what I propose.
50

Dragonlord,

08/07/2008 14:04:04
61# 600 million is not a lot of money? I would love to see your wage packet. Perhaps you could promise to pay any short fall, so that council tax rises won't be needed?
This trainset will ruin the city, no-one has yet done an artist's impression with all the wires on show. How strange is that? It proves what we have been saying all along, tram wires are ugly, and will ruin any tourist's pictures of the castle.
51

David55,

London 08/07/2008 14:06:39
#65. How much money has been spent on the design of this tram system even before taking into account the cost of construction works? I remember colleagues carrying out the design as far back as 2002 and consultants ain't cheap.

Dropping the project right now would be a huge waste of money. At least when the trams are in you will see something tangible for your hard earned taxes.

Stopping a multi-million pound construction project, after you've committed to go ahead, is not a good idea. The contractors and design team members would all make claims against the council and the end result would be a huge loss of taxpayers cash for no good reason.
52

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:07:06
Mario (64) - The decision to proceed with the first phase has clearly been made and I would prefer to see whether it comes in on budget and how it affects our public transport system (particularly bus services) before a commitment is made to any other phase. When the stakes for Lothian Buses and transport in Edinburgh generally are so high, that seems only sensible to me.
53

David55,

London 08/07/2008 14:15:52
#69 - Is all of route 1a being constructed in the first phase?

http://www.tramtime.com/tramhovermap.html
54

,

08/07/2008 14:16:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
55

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:20:04
David (70) - Yes, that's the plan on the assumption that the costs do not exceed £545m.
56

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:20:22
#71

Simple: Lack of funds and a complete lack of space.
57

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:20:47
#15:

James,

There are some big differences between the parliament building and the trams:-

1. The parliament building is confined to one, fairly small site on the outskirts of the city. The trams will be present on most of the main arterials through the city.

2. The parliament causes no congestion whatsoever. The trams will cause untold congestion.

3. The parliament does not affect main transport routes. The trams will.

4. The parliament does not get stuck on Leith Walk when it snows, causing yet more congestion and inconvenience. The trams will do.

5. The parliament was built on a piece of land where there was room to build it. The trams will be built on space created by pushing everything else out of the way, regardless of how long it's been there or how important it is.

6. If you don't want to go to the parliament, you need not. The trams will be in your way where ever you go.

The main problem with the parliament was the spiralling cost. This was due in no small part to the fact that politicians got involved where engineers, architects and builders should have been given a free reign. It was also due to gross under-estimation of the cost in order to get the project approved.

Do you honestly think that exactly the same is not going to happen with the trams? If you do, then you are kidding yourself.
58

Optimus Prime,

Cybertron 08/07/2008 14:21:39
EUAN

#55 "The layout of Edinburgh is completely unsuitable to accommodate a tram network"

So how the hell did we accomodate one in the past....!!

You are a typical example of a status quo, scared of change, anti council citizen who cannot see the wood for the trees. Did it every occur to you that the many thousands of dedicated professionals who have or are working on this job might actually know what they are doing.

The Tram will be the best thing to happen to this city since the construction of the New Town, mark my words.....mind you Euan, you'd probably have thought that was a waste of money as well!!
59

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:23:03
Mario (66) - Your apology for your "half insults" is half accepted. After all, you may think me a "fool", but at least I can spell "minutiae".

Please don't do it again: I bite back.
60

David55,

London 08/07/2008 14:27:55
#72 - Local and central government are not renowned for getting projects completed to cost and on time.

Personally I think that a rail link from the airport into Edinburgh Waverley would have been much more beneficial for the city. However, as usual the politicians know best. The bus services in Edinburgh were good (outside of rush hour) so I didn't really see the need for a tram system.
61

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:29:25
#68:

"...At least when the trams are in you will see something tangible for your hard earned taxes."

Too bloody right we will! Every single major road in Edinburgh will be blocked up, constricted or simply no go entirely.

It would be cheaper (and far better for Edinburgh) to cancel the whole thing now. By the time this project reaches its conclusion, it will likely cost 20-30 times what they are quoting now---and expect plenty of costs to be hidden too.

They have ripped up all the roads and replaced plenty of aging gas mains, sewers and water mains, which probably needed to be done in any case.

Right guys, the joke's over. Fill the holes in, tarmac the roads and re-open them. Let's here no more about building a rediculous train set.
62

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:30:28
#37 fresian,dubai 08/07/2008 13:23:23

"Peter, No29, A great white elephant? is that an african or arctic elephant"

With such a retrograde step backwards to installing such a primitive system as Trams, perhaps I should have said Mastodon, or Hairy Mammoth. That OK Fresian?

63

Annoyingboi,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:34:53
More spin from the EEN when anyone with any brain cells knows that the trams are placing Edinburgh into even more of a decline than the weak economy has!

#3 - Perhaps they won't leave but thousands are on the way out of Edinburgh. The Poles are leaving in their droves, the hotels and restaurants are paying off staff as there are less money around. The Financial Services giants are not recruiting. Look out for the next census on the Edinburgh population - we have reached our peak and the population is once again moving into decline, as it has done many times before.
64

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:35:14
#75

Firstly, I'm not scared of change.

Secondly, the reason that trams are unsuitable for Edinburgh is that the rest of the City is already served by a world-class, flexible bus service. Why on EARTH would we want to try and squeeze trams down these already well-used transportation routes?!

I'm fully aware that there are many fully qualified professionals working on the trams and that none of my criticism of this project is directed against the contractors.

You are clearly one of the minority of people who have been hoodwinked into thinking the tram line is a good thing when it's nothing more than a monumental waste of Scottish taxpayers money.

And no, the New Town was not a waste of money.

Also, well said #78, very well said.
65

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:35:32
David (77) - I agree with all you say but would add:

1. I do not understand how TIE can be claiming that 95% of costs are now "fixed" when there was (and, to my knowledge, still is) no approved final detailed design. You will recall this was the major source of cost overruns on the Holyrood building.

2. Lothian Buses were never asked for their ideas on how to improve public transport in Edinburgh and, indeed, they have recently confirmed that their existing service could have been reviewed to accommodate the (then) anticipated population increase. This would have required substantial investment and possible additional traffic management measures but, the point is, this option was simply not considered because, as you say, "the politicians know best".

Despite my criticisms, I am not "anti-tram". I just do not consider that this project is robust or is likely to achieve the benefits being claimed.
66

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:37:28
#75:

"So how the hell did we accomodate one in the past....!!"

The one in the past only went along Leith Walk and Princes Street. They were a lot smaller than the ones proposed now and were powered by moving cables under the road. As such, they were more or less immune to weather.

They were removed in the 1950s when there was nowhere near the amount of vehicular traffic on our roads.

The situation is completely different nowadays and the proposals in their entirety will block up most of the major through routes in Edinburgh. This project is anti-car in the extreme and is without precident in terms of downright pig-headed stupidity.

They MUST cancel it NOW.
67

David55,

London 08/07/2008 14:37:52
#78 Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head - Embrace your inner tree hugger and get out your car. Use the nice shiney new tram and the existing bus network. That way the congestion won't be a problem.
68

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:39:25
#84

You've got it all wrong man, all wrong...
69

Linda,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:46:02
Gullible journalist has swallowed TIE's PR puff.
What about all the businesses that are closing along the route?

Elsewhere we read about Lothian buses problems, this will only get worse as what money there is will have to bail out the Trams annual deficit in first instance.
70

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:50:41
Sorry, the one in the past was actually more extensive than just princes street and leith walk, but the other things I say still stand. For a start, years ago, trams would interact with other traffic. Now they plan to build an excusive "tramway" and exclude al other traffic---a sure recipe for congestion.
71

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 14:52:19
And what inner tree hugger would that be David55?
72

,

08/07/2008 14:53:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

David55,

London 08/07/2008 15:02:52
#82 - Sarah - I work for a consultant. In the consultant's report(s) there will be loads of "cover yourself" caveats. They don't know what they will find when they start digging up large expanses of the city. There is no way the project will come in on budget. I'm rather surprised that they don't have a detailed design. I would have thought this had been done unless the contractor is taking the scheme on to detailed design. Hopefully the performance (scheme) design is quite well progressed.


74

Edinburgh 100,

Musselburgh 08/07/2008 15:04:26
So it would appear according to the article that TIE have created a way of bucking the economic slow down. We have the credit crunch, banks wont lend, business are already noticing a fall in demand, people cant get morgages, the price of food and fuel is soaring, but according to the article above none of this is effecting Edinburgh, What B~~~~~~~ks. Every statement given by TIE is that it is all lovely and rosie in the garden, again what B~~~~~~~~~ks
75

David55,

London 08/07/2008 15:06:03
#88 - Maybe you haven't got one.
76

Mr H 2u,

Embra 08/07/2008 15:33:33
Come on now. Half a billion pounds is a bargain for a fancy No 22 bus. Stop moanin'.
77

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 15:35:37
David (90) - TIE do have a detailed design but I don't think it has yet been approved and were only a fortnight ago holding public exhibitions to display the drawings.

It must now be well over a year since the infrastructure and vehicle tenders were invited and these were signed only last month. The utility diversions contractors were appointed in October 2006 and these works have been taking place since last year.

In these circumstances, as a consultant, would you say that it is credible that costs can be "95% fixed"?

78

Statsman,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 15:40:57
This is nothing more than an outrageous puff piece. Is the EEN now taking direct orders from TIE spin doctors?
79

Save Portobello Park,

Duddingston 08/07/2008 16:00:56
Euan you say that "My motivation Mario is to see public money spent wisely and correctly, not poured down the drain in order to satisfy the twisted visions of certain councillors."

Every single councillor voted for the trams, with only one exception. Which "certain" councillors do you mean?
80

Statsman,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 16:21:59
Let's put this one to bed.

There is only funding for TramLINE 1A which is a direct replacement for the 22 bus with the bus route extended to the airport. The tram route that is directly replacing the bus will be less frequent at four per hour instead of six. Furthermore, the number of stops for the 22 bus replacement will be halved - making it less convenient for travellers - not to mention the elderly and disabled.

The tram pick up points on road will be unsafe as they are on narrow islands in the middle of the road. Running for the tram is out of the question in this scenario but people will try it anyway and die. People are also likely to die if a long queue forms on the narrow islands.

Finally, Lothian Buses know this tram route is fiscal stupidity. They went to parliament and said bus services need to be axed to make the line profitable. They even went as far as to say that all competition to the line by bus be made illegal. Be assured that bus services will be axed until the line turns a profit. These measures will include decanting from a bus, onto a tram and then onto a bus again in the city centre where you are currently directly connected by a bus route.

This project is all about having a tramline for having a tramline's sake. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the transport needs of the city.

The council even okayed the building of a tower block of posh flats on a direct disused rail link that existed to Ocean Terminal i.e. Leith North Station. They argued for the Abbeyhill Loop because they said it was in Edinburgh's transport interests, got the land, then built an ugly block of flats on it. Sure, they left enough room for a railway but made it so close that it would run inches from the flats making it worthless.

This council is full of it. I don't mean the politicians. I mean the senior officials. There needs to be a purge.
81

Andrew,

08/07/2008 16:57:07
Today at 13.30, Shandwick Pl, Coates & Atholl Cres
were sunny and peaceful with young business folk having their lunches on the grass, seats and walls. They could even hear themselves talk! No traffic, no noise & no fumes. SUPERB!
82

The Judge,

08/07/2008 16:58:31
Excellent post #97

The tramLINE is a vanity project for a handful of councillors and a few employees. LRT bus passengers will be bailing it out for years to come.

I still can't work out who the tramLINE passengers will be, nobody living in a £250k shoebox down on the docks will ever set foot on public transport. They won't mix with the plebs.
83

Edinburgh Mum,

Gorgie 08/07/2008 17:03:52
I was reading all of your comments and forgot about the chicken in the oven, it's burnt!
Anyhow I am anti tram because of the amount of cash that is being spent on it. It could have been spent in more needed placed eg schools, hospitals and youth centres/clubs. I very very rarely use the buses as I find them far too difficult and dangerous to use with my 2 year old in his buggy. But I will grit my teeth and await the trams with trepidation. I will take my son on them and give them a go. If they are not child friendly and like the buses, full of bad smelling weirdos then I will opt to keep using my car to commute to work.
84

,

08/07/2008 17:19:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
85

Graem3s,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 17:32:03
#100. how are the buses dangerous for buggys?? i mean the bus lowers for you so u dont have to push it up a step, and you even have a little place where u can sit with it; however i assume you mean busses are too - inconvienient for you. perhaps a disabled person needs the space and you need to (god forbid) fold up your buggy!

And you use your car; im guessing you have a short commute and you are the only person in teh car pumping fumes into the air, adding to pollution and ruining the environment.. tut tut tut, the moral behind trams are good, but just political chaos and egonamity have just spun out of control!

86

Edinburgh Mum,

Gorgie 08/07/2008 17:50:20
102Graem3s
My son has been seriously hurt at a bus stop (uneven ground, bus stop seat the same height as his head!) Having to take him out of his buggy to get on bus as there is already one on the bus whilst trying to fold buggy, lift it on bus, pay fare, stop my son running off. No one offers to help. A man tried to tug him off his seat as he thought he was more eligible because he had disabled pass (no wheelchair). He has been thrown/thrust forward by careless bus drivers and their break happy ways. In my car he is strapped into safety tested car seat. I am an extremely careful driver and I know all the rat runs to avoid the traffic, thus saving time and not having a bored, tantruming 2 year old in the back seat. I strongly suspect you do not have children. Thankyou for your response to my original comment but there really was no need as you had nothing of much importance to say. Oh and just for the record, my car causes less harm to the enviroment than a cow's ar se does. Lets all get on the ban cows bandwagon!
87

Graem3s,

08/07/2008 17:59:01
you are correct; i have no children as quite frankly on buses i see so many parents who have no control over their children and have the run of the bus! what sort of upbringing do they get thinking they can do what they like, when they like - oh yes, the next generation!

88

Edinburgh Mum,

Gorgie 08/07/2008 18:03:18
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece
89

Graem3s,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 18:05:56
ahhh... i see - so in tyour perfect world, every shop would have a drive thru like McDonalds!!

that figures.
90

Edinburgh Mum,

Gorgie 08/07/2008 18:08:06
104Graem3s
Oh you are refering to the benefit sponging schemies. I work, I can afford a car. I choose to drive to work. Being a parent you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. But a bus is definately not a good or a safe place for a child. So please do not condem me for not wanting to put my son's safety at risk. When he is 5 I can walk him to school, jump on the tram at Balgreen and get off at my work near Newhaven. Until that time, my hands are firmly gripping my steering wheel.
91

Edinburgh Mum,

Gorgie 08/07/2008 18:11:07
106The Genuine Mario Antoinette
If only you were more intelligent............

My problem is not with my parenting skills or with my son. It's SAFETY that is the issue here. If there are any other of my points that need explaining to you then go ask someone else ok.

Dearie me...
92

Mallory,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 19:39:41
We are not getting a tram network - one teram line may be finished but it doesn't even go all the way to the airport. (Is a complaint to the Advertising Authority in order here?)

If anyone is snapping up property along the route its because (a) the drop in land values and (b) the desperation of small businesses who have seen takings dwindle during this shambles. I know of at least one City Centre business which intends to close down for possibly six months as turnover is down so much and laying off staff and starting afresh is a tempting option.

A question that I have never seen answered is why tracks are not being laid immediately the utilities are moved.
Another mystery is the absence of work at various key bottlenecks along Princes Street, Leith Walk and soon Haymarket.

Is there nobody at TIE who has experience of master-planning and joined up thinking?

Could it be that even now the final route has not been agreed or land along the route purchased?




93

,

08/07/2008 21:12:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 21:17:53
#117 - Foo. Simple question. Do you consider the spending of c.£700m to achieve less profits than if you did absolutely nothing else to be sensible? Because that is the business plan for the Edinburgh tramline (read it if you don't believe me).

Not just that, but it doesn't even expect to make any material difference to congestion while door to door journey times will for most users rise!

It is a complete joke of a document by a bunch of incompetents in TIE who are interested in one thing. Not improving transport in Edinburgh, but in keeping themselves in jobs at our expense.

And if this project is scrapped right now, yes £200m+ will have been wasted, but it will still be a better result than spending another £500m or so together with the ongoing losses that the tram line is forecast to make every year it is in operation.
95

Ian down under,

Kawerau 08/07/2008 21:32:01
Strange logic. Last week it was doom and gloom because all thes evil trams are closing down succesful businesses. This week it's doom and gloom because the trams are already breeding future succesful businesses.
The antitrammers just need to get out more. Trmas work and cities which use them are expanding their networks. The only problem with our tram plans is that they are too timid and should probably be underground in the city centre but look forward to a much more pleasant city environment in the future. Just make sure that we get through ticketing and regional passes on local buses, trains and trams to make the system a roaring success. It really does work in any other city I've seen it and it will work in Edinburgh.
If the antitrammers [ie pro bus and car ] are not convinced come over to New Zealand and visit the city of Auckland. They have buses [by Stagecoach!] cars and motorways everywhere. They have one tiny wee station with 40 year old trains running very infrequently and the place is absolute chaos. The airport is 6 miles from the city and the bus takes over an hour outside the peak periods. Rush hour is gridlock. That is the choice for Edinburgh do you want Auckland style congestion or do you want to move around freely? Do not lose this chance it may not come again.
96

Julian.,

edinburgh 08/07/2008 22:25:06
Edinburgh Mum,

If you think your car is doing less damage to the environment than a cow's @rse then I'm afraid you are talking out of yours.

As well as emitting CO2 in your car you are also pumping out sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide, a range of particulates and around 10 other toxic gases.

May I suggest you dump the car and join those so-called wierdos on the buses who may be less well off than you, but probably have more knowledge about transport pollution.
97

Euan,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 22:29:05
GraemeH, #118

Very well said, very well said indeed.

Sadly everyday common sense has been completely over looked when it has come to what is now Edinburgh's very own tram fiasco....
98

Julian.,

edinburgh 08/07/2008 22:33:12
Mallory # 112

A few corrections:-

(1) As I've pointed out for about the hundredth time, tram networks usually start with single lines. The option to upgrade to a network is always open.

(2) The tram line isn't finished.

(3) When the tram line is finished it will go to the airport.

(4) Your point about laying the tracks at the same time as moving the utilities is a good one. Unfortunately nobody, including TIE, has been able to explain this one.

EEN...TAKE NOTE. WITH BUSINESSES GOING BUST LEFT, RIGHT AND CENTRE ON LEITH WALK AND SHANDWICK PLACE, WHY DON'T YOU INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE RATHER THAN REPORTING ON MINOR ISSUES LIKE POSSIBLE PROPERTY PRICE RISES ALONG THE ROUTE.
99

Julian.,

edinburgh 08/07/2008 22:42:47
AH, EUAN,

I wondered where you'd gone.

Sadly I have to say that GraemeH's points were not so well said.

The tram line is going to cost just over £500m, not £700m. If you have such a good argument, why exagerrate.

Also, maybe it's just my strange notion, but I always thought that public services were provided to meet slightly higher goals than achieving a profit.

As for journey times, according to TIE, the trams will be quicker than buses. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable claim to me. Are you and Graeme saying this is not going to be the case?

As for overall traffic congestion, where is the hard evidence that this is going to get worse? And even if there is evidence, how reliable is it. One thing we do know from other tram systems is that they make 15% of car drivers switch to trams.
100

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 23:04:10
#124 - Taking your points in turn.

The current budget for the tram line is £592m. This excludes costs funded by Edinburgh City Council such as many of the traffic diversions, rates rebates which come from Central Govt and the losses suffered by traders, higher fuel costs for buses and other road users stuck in traffic jams caused by the works, together with loss of economic output, etc.

Lothian Buses is not a public service - it is a private service which is owned by the council. While there is a measure of public benefit in infrastructure projects, one which fails to cover its own ongoing costs (never mind making any contribution to its capital costs) and turns a previously profitable business into a loss making one is economic stupidity.

The idea that trams are quicker is another lie put about by TIE - the faster journey times are due to prioritisation at junctions, part off-road running, no driver ticketing, etc. This could all be introduced for buses at a tiny fraction of the cost.

Note I also mentioned door to door times. Given the frequency of the tram is lower than the existing bus services (ie longer average waiting times), there are fewer stops and in areas like South Gyle and Gogar the tram taking a route which skirts developments rather than goes into them meaning many (most) people have further to walk to / from the tram than the existing bus, as well as the people whose services are being cut for the tram meaning bus/tram/bus rather than just one bus, you quite easily conclude that the forecast door to door times will on average increase.

While there is some limited evidence of modal shift from car to tram, the quantum involved is not material enough to make a real difference to overall congestion, which as you state is not forecast to rise (car usage is actually falling slighty). And it certainly does not justify the cost. The modal shift figures in the business plan also presume that 1) the waterfront development will go ahead as origin
101

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 23:06:54
cont. ... as originally planned, which looks highly unlikely now and 2) the people living there largely work in Princes St or South Gyle, which no one knows will happen or not given it ain't built out yet.
102

McGinty,

08/07/2008 23:07:53
Oh you cannae take yer Granny on a bus..
103

Papa? Nicole! Papa?,

08/07/2008 23:18:56
If they didn't put the trams in, just think how much we'd all save on our council tax.

Perhaps they'd give us a rebate.

Perhaps they'd give us a taxi account, or reduce the bus fares...
104

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 23:27:02
#129 The current cost of the tramline is roughly the same as the entire Council Tax revenue for almost three years.

As an alternative, if it was to be put on deposit and use the interest to top up council income, it would give a permanent reduction of about 9-10% in council tax. Or about £125 saving per year for every single household in Edinburgh.
105

truthsleuth,

08/07/2008 23:40:38
The increase in road traffic has ruined every city and most forward thinking cities have developed tram networks with property values increasing more along tram routes.

Most studies show there is a greater tendency for car drivers to change to tram than change to bus.
106

truthsleuth,

08/07/2008 23:41:09
Edinburgh Mum,
And killing a few children and others into the bargain.
107

Arrow,

edinburgh 08/07/2008 23:48:11
re the cost of the Tram
Edinburgh Council announced on 19 January 06:

- Tomorrow, 20 January 06, the council will issue a report on the proposed tram lines, to be discussed at a full council meeting on 26 January 06.

- This report will state that, due to costs having risen from £473m to £714m, the council is no longer able to afford the the whole of Lines 1 and 2 at this stage, and it therefore recommends that the following should be shelved:

- the western and northern parts of Line 1, running from Leith via Granton to join Line 2 near Haymarket.

- the eastern end of Line 2, linking Edinburgh Airport and Newbridge.

it is not a tram system it is a tram line. for the cost the money could be put into a bank and the interest @ 6% could the city £30 million enough to give everyone in Edinburgh access to a taxi or maybe a bus!!!
108

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 08/07/2008 23:55:09
Julian (122) - The reason why the tramlines are not being laid at the same time as the utilities are being moved is that it was thought that it would be cheaper to move them before the infrastructure was put in place.

When that decision was taken, the detailed design was far from complete and it was felt that, to wait until it was final, would mean that the cost of moving the utilities would rise in the interim.

A sceptic might say that the early diversion of utilities (before being in possession of the all the necessary technical information) was another ploy used to ensure the scheme would proceed in the end on the basis that, even if construction costs rose in the intervening period, too much money would then have been spent to pull the plug - an argument which I see has been put forward on this forum today.

Also, at the time the decision was taken, the May 2007 election was yet to take place and the prospect of an SNP administration was considered quite likely. The SNP had stated their intention to scrap the project so the race was on for TIE to spend as much money/undertake as much works as possible to ensure that it would become too politically difficult to scrap the project. In that way, TIE have secured their own jobs for a bit longer.

If you feel that I am being too cynical, I would suggest that you read some of the government guidance on methods used by promoters, particularly those involved with publicly-funded infrastructure projects. Here is a relevant quote from the DfT Guidance, "Procedures for Dealing with Optimism Bias in Transport Planning": "When a project goes forward, it creates work for engineers and construction firms. If these actors are involved in or indirectly influence the forecasting process, then this may influence outcomes in ways that make it more likely that the project will be built.”
109

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 00:02:07
Truthsleuth (131). And what makes you think that Lothian Buses could not have come up with a more effective solution, when the itself company is on record as saying that they could have but were not consulted?

I agree that most studies show that there is a greater tendency for car drivers to change to tram than bus but that assumes the tram will be easily accessible to those potential passengers. Who do think is going to fill those trams if the Waterfront Development is not built imminently? Phase 1A (and Phase 1B even more so at Granton) is massively reliant on the Waterfront for its predicted passenger numbers and has spectacularly failed to maximise patronage from other generators which would have supplied passengers, even in times of poor economic performance, eg, schools, hospitals, universities, etc.
110

James (1),

09/07/2008 00:13:33
#74 Can I take your points one at a time?
1-The parliament sanctioned this tram line so whilst located in one place it has ruined the rest of city.
2- As above
3- As above
4- Does not operate all year round either which may be a good thing?
5- The only reason the tram line is going where it is going is because the exorbitant cost of it, which we have not yet see the last of, stopped more chaos being done.
6- as at 5

The remarks about the spiralling costs will be exactly the same for this tram line. The parliament was only 10 times over budget and so will the tram line. Who cares about public money? You have politicians who do not actually live in the real world, which could be the main problem with these stupid ventures, listening to and believing the hype sold to them. I mean would these advisors have any vested interest, surely not?
That would be like saying a double glazing salesman is ONLY selling you the product because he wants to ensure you have good window insulation.
Gullible who describe most politicians. Very clever but no actually common sense.
The blue touch paper is lit and we can only await the big bang.
111

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 00:22:44
#136 - James, Parliament did NOT approve the current tram line. The provided money for lines 1 and 2. But when TIE worked out that would not work within the budget, they decided they would create a new single line instead. The current proposal has not actually been voted on by the Scottish Parliament.

Amazing isn't it? £700m or so spent on a project with no parliamentary scrutiny of the current proposal and instead voted on by a bunch of councillors, none of whom have any significant financial or large business experience and who in all lieklihood did not even read the business plan.
112

James (1),

09/07/2008 00:30:58
#137 point taken!
Frightening that cash is doled out without any real scrutiny.
This venture will be a " lay the tracks as far as the money will take them and then the public can get a bus the rest of the way"
113

Julian.,

edinburgh 09/07/2008 00:56:41
SarahB #134

Thanks for that. What you say confirms my suspicions. I have an e-mail from TIE saying that they hoped to do some track laying at the same time when the plans and contracts were finalised. If that is the case it is a disgrace and there should be an EEN/public enquiry into why they were not done at the same time from the start.

After all, these are not minor issues. We're talking about dozens of businesses going under and major traffic upheaval for years in Scotland's capital.
114

Julian.,

edinburgh 09/07/2008 01:13:47
GraemeH,

We can agree on some points.

When you say the current budget is £592m I think you're including the Granton spur which is not part of the issue as it has not had the go ahead. The actual cost is somewhere around £520m. On business compensation, this is being funded by TIE. On traffic management I don't have the facts to hand but surely this is being funded by TIE also.

On LRT. If it's 92% owned by The Council then the council appoints the chief exec and the board and votes on all strategic decisions. Maybe it's not technically a public service but in all but name it is. As for it making money to cover it's costs I disagree. There are numerous examples of valuable public services which do not cover their cost. Tram fares will be set in the public interest NOT in the interests of making a profit. Whether it would make a profit if run as a private company is just idle specualtion.

Whether trams are physically quicker I don't know, but I suspect they are. But, as discussed before, trams carry 250 people compared to 40 to 80 on buses. Therefore it is feasible to have an inspector on trams but not buses.

On tram frequency, are you saying they are only going to be every 15 mins. I find it hard to believe but, if so, I agree with you on that.

On the shift from car to tram, you say it is not signifcant. I disagree; a 15% shift is very significant and would make a big difference to congestion.
115

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 01:47:18
Julian - there is no budget for 1b(which has an even worse economic case). The budget is for Phase 1a only, including contingency. Contingency is already being used up.

Some business compensation is funded by the tram project funds however rates relief is funded by Central Govt. TIE is managing the roadworks, but I have seen ECC vans and staff on a number of the diversions. The council is also losing income from parking suspensions and has costs in all the traffic management orders.

On LRT, the council cannot interfere in its decision making. It an anomaly that it is still council owned - in virtually every other city the bus service was privatised. That they want to ban competition in order to force people to use it is illegal. Fares will not be set in the public interest, but will have to be set at a level necessary for LRT to cover its costs. Effectively bus users will subsidise the operating costs of the tram.

Buses and trams are not that different in speeds, although buses are slightly faster in top speed. On inspectors, London manages no driver ticketing without inspectors.

On frequency, it is 6 trams per hour - less than the current 22 and much less when all services affected (eg 100, X48) are taken into account.

Given your interest in the project take the time to read the business plan and appendices - find out just how little benefit we are getting for the money spent.
116

jamtart,

Beechboro Western Australia 09/07/2008 02:24:36
Come and look at the tram system in Melbourne,you will soon see the benefits trams will bring to Edinburgh.
117

Listening,

09/07/2008 09:11:29
I really can't understand the negativity of most of you unless of course you just like a good moan or if you don't personally benefit then it's no good.

The trams, as I've said since the idea was first bantered, will be a great boost to the city and it is now begining, only begining, to show that is the case. There will be HUGE benefits, at least to those of us ready to impartially see them.

There will of course be all you lot who will still say they are a disaster even when it is obvious you are wrong, but it does take all sorts, dinnit!!
118

Mallory,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 09:49:21
Julian #122

Will the first tram line actually deposit passengers within walking distance of the terminal building?

I agree totally with you about the lack of EEN reporting.
119

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 10:49:05
Mario (144) - I do not work for Lothian Buses but I do acknowledge the fact that it has achieved the best figures for public transport usage in the UK and currently provides 114 million passenger journeys a year (these figures having increased year on year for the last 7 years or so).

Once Phase 1A is operational, Lothian Buses will still be the backbone of public transport in the city but its ability to expand, renew and encourage new users citywide will be impaired by the fact that any profits it may have will be required to cover the losses sustained by the tram and providing for the repairs and renewals of over £44m which have not been provided for in the business case. This will necessitate increased ticket prices and cut-backs in bus services/frequencies. You may not think it "positive" to try to protect the buses, but I do.

I have read volumes of papers produced by TIE and their consultants, together with NAO and DfT guidance, etc, and yet you suggest I disregard these bodies (and Lothian Buses) and, instead, take advice from the Genuine Mario Antoinette, who tells me he has not bothered to read anything much on the subject, who thus operates on nothing more than wishful thinking and who can find little more to progress his argument than continual insults?

120

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 11:28:53
#143 - Try reading up on this project and just how small the benefits you allude to are. Or that every single tram system installed in the UK has been an economic failure.

Yes, there will be some benefits for some people, butfor £700m there should be a heck of a lot more. That is the problem I have against this tramline. I am not "anti-tram" in principle, but I object to massive amounts of taxpayers money being wasted on a scheme which achieves so little.
121

jdships,

09/07/2008 11:41:45
Yes, excellent for anyone wanting to go from Ocean Terminal to the Gyle. For the rest of us we will end up paying for it when the bus services to anywhere else in the city are cut back to pay for the damned things.

The above posted by Liz (10) is the most common sense posting in weeks.
I live on North side of the City my nearest tram will be at least one mile away - what benifit is goning to be to me ?
Buses take me to all parts of the city from the end of the street

144 The Genuine Mario Antoinette
Once again trying , not very successfully to defend the indefensible.
You are entitled to your opinion unfortunately they do not hold up in a discussion
You write
"It seems that you dont want it to and you don't want any alternative to the car and a plethora of buses "
What's wrong with the present bus service provided ?
The trams are only going to serve 6/8% of the population - fact.
What about the people in South and East Edinburgh who don't live within a country mile of a tram line ?

If they were building a "trm network" then it would create a completely different siuation

Can somone explain what are " the huge benifits to the City " which were put forward by another poster ?

122

World class concrete,

09/07/2008 11:46:36
#148: It is so frustrating to see the well-informed comments particularly of Sarah B continually rubbished by you. What is the point of the EEN discussion facility other than to have a proper discussion? You seem to want to trivialise any attempt by others to do this.
123

,

09/07/2008 11:52:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
124

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:24:50
#152 Foo,ejinbara

"Had Edinburgh been so against trams there would have been a massive outcry"

Had the last Labour controlled Council held a referendum on this issue, I think it would have been pretty well guaranteed that the "massive outcry" would have materialised.

Unfortunately they did not hold a referendum as they were well aware that it would fail and did not wish to suffer a third defeat following the failures of the Congestion Charge and 'privitisation' of Council Housing referendums. In any event they were also over-confident of being returned to power in the last local authority elections.

While you may well be correct that it is now too late to protest, it is also not unlikely that the project will end in failure (certainly that is my hope and that of many others who are posting on this matter).

It is also a great pity that the SNP did not manage to obtain an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament as that would have nipped this crazy project in the bud before too much money had been spent on it.



125

World class concrete,

09/07/2008 12:31:09
#153: rather off the topic, but I can't help noticing a lot of comments from you on this thread (22 at a quick count), and yet on principle you don't like people who write to newspapers?
126

Niadh,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:42:20
#75 Optimus Prime
The earlier generation of trams in Edinburgh were NOT each 40 metres long.
#148 Mario
What makes you right and Sarah B wrong?
#152 Foo
If it wasn't for the minute detail you wouldn't be here.
As with everything in this world beyond single cell organisms small changes to the minute detail can have considerable consequences. for instance add or remove the right chromosome here and there and it changes you from male to female or vice versa.

This thing is hugely expensive and there are simply no guarantees on a return on that investment.
This is even more important as it looks like Britain and possibly the world is slipping into a recession.
127

Niadh,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 12:49:13
#124 Julian et al
STOP CALLING IT A TRAM SYSTEM!!!
It's not a tram system. It is a single line and without going near a suitably large park and ride facility the people coming in from the west of the city are not going to be interested in using this.
What about people coming in from the South and East? The tram is going to be NO use whatsoever to them.
15% in other cities does not necessarily translate to a similar saving in Edinburgh. You are not comparing like for like.
128

Sloo,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 13:30:22
Wow this thread is more fun than the footie ones! Seriously though, as someone who lives in the south of Edinburgh I am well used to getting sweet fa from the council (well what do you expect - I work for a living and therefore don't have the same need for leisure and entertainment facilities as the schemies) and the trams is yet another example of this. Don't, worry, they'll rip them up in 20 years once they realise that Princes Street is NOT the focal point of the city, it's only busy because all the buses go there.
129

Euan,

Edinburgh 09/07/2008 16:03:35
#156, Mario

If one ever casts a glance at Page 3 of The Sun, they usually see what's good for them..
130

sodajerk,

09/07/2008 16:06:19
Trams are the Red Headed Stepchildren of the public transport world.



131

Ian down under,

Kawerau 09/07/2008 21:46:44
Debate is healthy and this is a good one. I'm stuck here in New Zealand where nobody debates anything and all governments every do is build more government office buildings. Infrastructure here is a new executive loo for cabinet ministers.
We have hardly any passenger trains, poor roads built on mud [I kid you not], our bus service is once a day, the local city buses stop at 6 o'clock. There are trolley buses in our capital city and Christchurch has a single line novelty tram. Nobody ever debates our lack of any decent transport.
Then I come home to Scotland, Longniddry now but used to be Musselburgh and I can move around quite easily. I've got trains to central Edinburgh, buses to the intermediate places and other parts of the city and my Dad's old bike for the rest.
You have by our standards fantastic transport although there are problems. These problems are being addressed and a tramway is part of the solution as is better rail use and decent buses. Over here we are getting a motorway built on one of our busiest routes, busier than the A1 in E. Lothian and with heaps of 50 tonne double lorries. The government will start this in 2012 and at one point it will cross a river so to save money they will shrinkt the motorway to a 2 lane single carriageway to save money. I kid you not.
So keep on debating the trams, buses, trains et al and keep investing. At least you are getting somewhere.
Incidentally our taxes are higher than yours and you start paying tax on the first dollar you earn/
132

Julian.,

edinburgh 10/07/2008 00:15:13
Niadh # 160,

Read my post #124. Apart from the fact that nit-picking over the use of the word tram system doesn't exactly bolster the anti-trammers argument, I didn't even call it a system. Not only that, I actually called it a line.
133

Julian.,

edinburgh 10/07/2008 00:18:51
Mallory # 145,

According to the planned map of the tram line, the trams will stop at Edinburgh airport:-

http://www.tramtime.com/tramhovermap.html

134

Julian.,

edinburgh 10/07/2008 00:21:53
GraemeH,

Well actually, according to TIE's website it says:-

"Costs stand at £592 million. This is broken down into £500m for Phase 1a and £92m for Phase 1b"
135

craig7653,

Port Seton 11/07/2008 07:53:24
All you tram lovers are in for a shock. When the trams come along, the council will sell the shares in Lothian Buses and it will become just like firstbus. You can wave good bye to the flat fare system, no early morning buses, no late night buses, no night buses, no clean buses and no more new buses. So unless you travel from the gyle to ocean terminal you will have a massive hike in bus fares etc. People please stop moaning about Lothian Buses. It really is the best in the UK. Just pray the council hold on to the shares.
136

Ian down under,

Kawerau 11/07/2008 22:16:39
#168 This does not need to happen. Holyrood could easily rule that all local services are charged the same fare, whoever operates them. The easiest way is to split the area into zones and charge flat fares for each zone or multiples and make the ticket valid on any operator be it First Scotrail, First Buses, Lothian Buses or TIE. It's done elsewhere and works no reason why it won't work here.
Before Thatcher's bus privatisation the Tyne and Wear Metro and buses ran through ticketing and it made travel very easy especially since you only needed change once to buy a ticket. In Edinburgh you either buy expensive one off tickets and use any bus or you commit to one company and wait for their services. That is not efficient and means you need tons of change weighing down your pockets.
137

eric,

lothian 12/07/2008 09:50:26
Glasgow gets super fast new high tech trains to its airport and Greater Glasgow we get tramline gee thanks,Glasgow seems to have got it right ,taking advabtage of what the victorians left the city,then crossrail etc ,It may be in stages but its spot on.well done them.
138

,

07/08/2008 00:45:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
139

,

07/08/2008 00:47:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
140

RedGreenInBlue,

Melbourne 02/09/2008 14:51:12
A belated rebuttal to Statsman (#97):

"The tram pick up points on road will be unsafe as they are on narrow islands in the middle of the road. Running for the tram is out of the question in this scenario but people will try it anyway and die. People are also likely to die if a long queue forms on the narrow islands."

Having lived on a tram route in Melbourne for a year, I can say from experience that this is simply not true.

Melbourne has about 30 tram routes. ALL street-running trams run in the centre of the streets, and on the busiest streets there are platforms separating the tram from the motor traffic to its left.

The platforms have barriers to prevent people from diving off into the traffic, In any case, most stops are situated just before traffic lights, so with signal synchronisation, the lights are usually red to traffic while the tram is at the platform. This enables passengers to alight and reach the pavement without waiting for traffic.

Where there is no platform, the main road rule is that no vehicles may pass a tram on the left when it is stationary at a tram stop, and passengers wait on the pavement I noticed that even the drivers of the most aggressive-looking utes stuck to this rule without exception. Maybe it was the prospect of a manslaughter charge, but probably it's because most people, even the most ardent petrolheads in their 5-L Holdens, actually don't like running people over. The rule is clear and easy to follow.

Centre-of-street running is better than kerbside bus lanes, because there's no conflict between public transport and the need of local businesses to have somewhere outside their shop for collections and deliveries. Passing vehicles can moves temporarily into the tram lane to pass a parked vehicle and moves back into the general traffic lane afterwards. As long as you don't impede a tram while doing so, there's no conflict and everyone's happy.

 

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.