Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


City chiefs look at permanent traffic ban for Princes Street

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: 14 April 2009
TURNING Princes Street into a pedestrianised zone with all vehicles except trams and bicycles being banned is set to be considered by city chiefs.
Deputy council leader Steve Cardownie said today that the success of the traffic diversions brought in for the trams building project meant that it was "foolish" not to discuss making it a permanent arrangement.

The idea has emerged from cycling lobby group Spokes, which is campaigning for the street to be closed to traffic once the £512 million Newhaven to Edinburgh Airport tram line is up and running.

The temporary closure of Princes Street, which became off-limits to buses and taxis from February 21, has worked well, with transport bosses claiming they had learned lessons after the botched closure of The Mound in October.

Councillor Cardownie said the case for permanently closing the street to traffic was now stronger as a result.

He said: "It's something that's well worth looking at. I think everybody has been pleasantly surprised with how well the traffic diversions have gone.

"With that knowledge, it would be foolish not to examine whether they should be made permanent. Any information we get from temporary traffic plans must be used to our advantage.

"If all the indications are that it will work, then I would say 'why not?'

"It's a fantastic street. It would be absolutely splendid."

Retailers reported better than expected customer numbers following the closure of the street in February, saying that the traffic diversions had helped encourage shoppers back in to the city centre.

Spokes said a busy shopping street crowded with vehicles would soon be regarded as a "relic of the past".

Spokesman Gary Bell said: "We want to promote the idea of the city as a place to be in rather than just to travel through.

"At the moment, there's no need to dodge buses or taxis, there's less pollution and it's just a much nicer area.

"Most major cities have pedestrianised public spaces. It seems like a relic of the past to have a thoroughfare clogged with buses and pedestrians and cyclists pushed to the margins."

The organisation said its campaign was at an early stage, but said it hoped to put pressure on the council in coming months.

Bruce Young, Lothian and Borders co-ordinator of the Association of British Drivers, said there would be no merit in permanently closing Princes Street to traffic.

He said: "I really can't see any reason for not opening up Princes Street to all vehicles, including cars, once the trams are up and running.

"At the moment, everybody is being squeezed away from Princes Street and, frankly, I can't see the point of having what is probably the broadest street in the city limited to trams and bikes."


The full article contains 470 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

alfonsa pedrosa,

embra 14/04/2009 11:57:11
This would be crazy doing this,only Princes Street can handle the volume of traffic that we get in the City.
2

hibbyspurs,

14/04/2009 12:00:04
And the backhanded punishment of the city's motorists goes on for voting down and humilitaing the council over congestion charging.

Pushing the buses off Princes Street as well would be an unmitigated disaster but of course we wont worry about that until some poor punter is knocked over and killed on George Street by a number 26 bus shall we?
3

Sally Longlegs,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:02:11
This has been on the cards since we voted against the congestion charge.It is only just being made public now.
We need to send our illustrious leaders to London permanently to join the expert professor whats his name again.
4

hibbyspurs,

14/04/2009 12:03:41
hmmmmmm of course it's interesting that it's a cyclying lobby which is pushing for this isnt it?

The guy harps on about "pedestrianised areas" but can I ask this: Are you a pedestrian if travelling on a bicycle?

Thought not....

Such a shock that this PC goody two shoes brigade on wheels is behind this and trying to twist the council into doing it to suit their own (very incosequential) needs.
5

TankEngine,

Uphall 14/04/2009 12:03:43
No surprise there then. This was always what the council had planned.
Anyway, I was up Princes St on Friday and what a mess. Can anyone also explain to me what all the "workers" in orange coats do all day?
6

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 12:04:36
#1-#3 and many more to come I'm sure - do you deny that the diversions have worked well - that buses are actually running better now?
7

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:06:38
Ignoring the grunts of the selfish , Quality of life is far better in cities with limited car access.

Go for it.
8

Seb,

14/04/2009 12:06:57
The closure of Princes St has made George Street utterly grim.
9

TLJ,

14/04/2009 12:07:30
An excellent idea. The peace and quiet following the diversion of the traffic and when the works weren't on was a joy to behold. It would enhance the street and attracts people back (as the retailers seem to be arguing).
10

jdships,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:09:32
Had an interesting conversation with a senior partner of a City Surveyors where he estimated George Street has around six/eight months service left before it requires major " surgery" to the road surface .
Already you can see the indents in the road where buses are braking .
Queen Street also is beginning to show signs of wear and tear
11

hibbyspurs,

14/04/2009 12:11:56
#9

Ok then, but if it's to be a "pedestranised area" then make it just that. All vehicles banned including, bikes, skateboards, roller blades, heelys etc. etc. so that those actually on foot can enjoy it to its full extent.

Otherwise dont bother as it's obviously just another backhanded way of attacking the city's car drivers.
12

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:13:08
Interesting that SPOKES are pushing for this.

(1) Will cyclists be sharing the road with the trams? Or
(2) Will they be sharing the pavements with the pedestrians (as at the moment)?
Or
(3) Both of the above - in all probability.
13

jdships,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:15:32
6 Duncan in Edinburgh,

If you speak to LT drivers they will tell you that timetables for buses using George Street are extremely difficult to adhere to with the build up of traffic at either end.
Too many bottleknecks in City centre - that needs to be addressed to really improve things .

Am still happy with the service offered by LT as for FB - pass !
14

eric,

lothian 14/04/2009 12:16:35
Amusing,London & Glasgow are so cool and so far ahead with having subway.
15

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 14/04/2009 12:19:06
Excellent idea . Now when can we have bus and cycle lanes on the city bypass ?
16

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 12:19:26
#13 I agree - on both counts. It's also frustrating that we have the technology in terms of the bustracker system to track and model the bottlenecks and identify where the fixes are needed, but any move to spend money on roads to improve bus services is met with a chorus of disapproval by car drivers who consider themselves the owners of the roads.
17

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:19:41
Glasgow isnt cool eric, its a bucket. Away from the city centre its full of shuffling drunks and people prematurely aged.

To state the obvious , under these "plans" (which probably wont happen anyway) it would make sense to have a separate bike lane.
18

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 12:20:20
#14 Aah, I was wondering where you were.
19

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 14/04/2009 12:20:24
8 - the only grim thing on George St are the hideous style bars for the 20 something tiny minds . Shut them down and restore the dignity of old EDinburgh .
20

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:25:53
The problem in edinburgh of course is how do cars traverse it if the new town is off limits ? We cant build any wide boulevards, the old town isnt moving out the way. We need massive public transport infrastucture investment (yep, more trams).

its going to be long and its going to be tough.
21

Unimpressed one,

14/04/2009 12:30:13
"The idea has emerged from cycling lobby group Spokes"

Good to see the council basing it's transport policy on the ideas of a minority interest group. I suppose since they listen to the babbling eco-bams as well, this is no great surprise. Why not just dig out the road a bit deeper whilst they're at it and we can make a canal for gondolas-R-us and barge holidays. Oh, and I believe nudists would appreciate a small corner of the gardens to cavort around in.
22

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:30:59
21 You are a cloon.
23

Vlad Tepes,

Snagov 14/04/2009 12:32:38
I suspect that many Edinburghers have avoided Princes Street like the plague for years because of traffic, choking fumes and packed pavements. This would make it actually worth visiting again.
24

Brian Ferrari,

14/04/2009 12:37:35
#23

Not quite so good for George Street though - which is architecturally far superior and has buildings on both sides.
25

Marathon,

14/04/2009 12:37:53
if we have to have the tram thing, would it not make sense to integrate it with buses?

another nonsense idea from tie.
26

Embra boy,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:39:41
#3 You'll be referring to our long lost ex Transport chief David Begg I assume.
27

Big bob 79,

14/04/2009 12:40:12
This comes as NO surprise. The council have always wanted to close Princes Street to all traffic when the trams come.
28

hibbyspurs,

14/04/2009 12:40:54
#21

Genius comment.
29

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:40:56
27 and why not ?
30

Ecto,

14/04/2009 12:41:54
No surprise this is now on the agenda the tree hugging wooly jumper wearing halfwits in the transport department are still trying to inflict revenge for rejecting thier last congestion charging scheme
31

Big bob 79,

14/04/2009 12:42:59
# 25
Large bus to tram interchanges will be built at Haymarket and ST. Andrews Square they have been planned since day one. The closure of Princes Street would no way reduce the integration of the trams and buses
32

Edinburgh Mum,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:44:22
This would be amazing. It would open the street/space up and make it more beautiful than it alredy is. I love shopping in Glasgow's, Manchesters and Birmingham's pedestrianised shopping areas. It would be wonderful to do this at home in Edinburgh. I tend to stay away from Princes St as it is no place for small child. I get sick of being tutted at for having a buggy. And if I have rammed anyone's ankles with my buggy then you more than likely deserved it. Pedestrianising Princes St would make it more welcome for ALL. At the moment it has been claimed by very rude office workers who think they own the city.
33

I love to eat Sellotape,

14/04/2009 12:47:45
But rude office workers DO own the city.
34

PaulB,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:49:30
This is an excellent idea and long overdue. The buses are running far better along George Street than they ever did bunched up on Princes Street. It also means we could have cafes and outdoor seating areas to enjoy the view. Bring it on!
35

Arrow,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:50:29
have a look at the damage that the diverted buses/HGVs are having on the cobbled streets that are the feature of the New Town. they were never built to withstand the degree of such traffic that is now using them and will not probably be a permananet feature. what happens when they have to be dug up and repaired or better still when the services under these roads have to be replaced having been damaged. a wee bit joined up thinking for the longer term and not a quick fix to deal with the problems that are popping up every day.
36

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:52:33
Only the clueless Edinburgh council could consider shutting Edinburghs main thoroughfare and divert traffic through a conservation streets that draw tourists and are of architectural interest. Create congestion and get in road tolls is their idea.
37

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:54:41
Orange Walking and sunsets.
38

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 12:56:06
How the hell can they say that the closure of Princes Street has "worked well"? It's hardly as though the street is opened to pedestrians is it? Most of it is a fenced-off building site.

This is just a load of political spin.
39

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 12:57:10
Solutions people. Where are your solutions instead of just moaning about things.

"lets just put everything back the way it was" isnt going to happen now is it ?
40

tomias,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 13:02:54
Yes look at us; all down to that Hanovarian mob- princes-who'd have them.
george Street and old statues !(Clerk Maxwell OK)
No the Germans have won hands down.
And milking us still for money !
41

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 13:04:37
#35 Haha! I love the complete lack of knowledge here. The New Town was built not with setted (cobbled) streets but with tarmac. Where setts have been introduced since was the result of the Victorian fashion for "olde worlde" style. Only a tiny fraction of New Town lanes originally had setts. If you want the "real" New Town then you need to rip up the setts.
42

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:05:04
I am thinking of going to Vietnam, just to have a look around.
43

I love to eat Sellotape,

14/04/2009 13:05:25
If you don't like what's happening in this city, why not invest in one of those "travel masks" that people sometimes wear on airplanes when they want to sleep?
44

P I Staker,

14/04/2009 13:06:26
Duncan, I'm a bit confused now (nothing unusual there) by your entry at #16, viz:".....we have the technology in terms of the bustracker system to track and model......"
I wonder if you have missed out a space and it should read 'bust racker', if so is this the sort of apparatus that the model you refer to would use, something like a brassiere??
45

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:07:38
41

Its all true. If you take off the facades, The New Town actually looks identical to Wester Hailles.
46

Harry Callahan,

14/04/2009 13:07:56
#41 Oh, you're so knowledgeable Duncan. Bend over and I'll let your boyfriend know you're ready.
47

D Heid ,

14/04/2009 13:09:38
totally against this idea, i was in town yesterday and the atmosphere was dire! we need the hussle and bussle, leave edinburgh alone it was fine as it was with out trams!
48

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:10:01
46 Your a really clever one arent you.
49

Harry Callahan,

14/04/2009 13:13:18
#48 Probably a lot more intelligent than you.
50

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:15:59
49 Probably not actually. Probably a miserable little edinburger who thinks negativity is somehow clever.
51

JT,

14/04/2009 13:16:07
Why the hell should the pain in the backside cyclists get preferential treatment? As for the tram workers did you enjoy your 4.5 day weekend - as you all scarpered on Thurs afternoon?
52

I love to eat Sellotape,

14/04/2009 13:16:34
I like to think of myself as quite clever. I could go on for ages about quantum physics. In Latin.
53

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 13:18:07
#46 Sometimes it is better to remain silent and have people suspect you are an idiot, than to speak and remove all doubt.
54

Harry Callahan,

14/04/2009 13:18:24
#51 a miserable big edinburger. Negativity is just as clever as your sarcasm.
55

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:19:39
55 Oh really.
56

Harry Callahan,

14/04/2009 13:20:07
#54 Whooph!! oh Duncie Doughnut...another brilliant post. You're so clever.
57

Harry Callahan,

14/04/2009 13:20:27
56 oh really.
58

antifa,

14/04/2009 13:22:15
This would be a good move - cities are for people, not cars. All good cities around the world have pedestrianised their central shopping areas, and Princes Street is made for it.

A rare moment of boldness from the council, which will need to be prepared for the roar of ignorant rage from the fat green-inkers above.
59

PG,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 13:22:53
The traffic doesn't keep me away from shopping in Princes Street, the fact that all the shops are tacky, nasty and grubby keeps me from shopping there. The gardens are gorgeous through and it would be nice to enjoy shopping in a wider, quieter street if there were decent shops.

I also tend to avoid that whole area when in the car, mainly because you never know when you turn a corner if you can still actually go down that road or not. However, for some journeys across town it remains the easiest route and if we push traffic onto George Street, we'll be having similar discussions about it in a few years time.
60

Pond Hall,

14/04/2009 13:23:50
Given the number of bus services that are being delayed, this will be the final nail in Lothian Buses, who are already struggling.

you couldn't write stuff like this.

For years its was Get all the buses onto Princes Street, millions spent on traffic management schemes

closing off junctions and along comes 1 TRAM LINE.

and its all change.... millions spent changing it all again

Bang goes the "Public Transport Interchange" on Princes street, how about a shuttle bus from George Street to Princes Street

Buses are already being delayed because of the tramworks.

Regularly I'v seen services with a 15min frequencies with 2, sometimes 3 buses running together.
61

Pond Hall,

14/04/2009 13:24:28
Bruce Young, Lothian and Borders co-ordinator of the Association of British Drivers, said there would be no merit in permanently closing Princes Street to traffic.

He said: "I really can't see any reason for not opening up Princes Street to all vehicles, including cars, once the trams are up and running.

who is this association?
62

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:26:26
Paul Young , of The Lothian and Borders Hat Layers Society beckoned towards a hat and said "thats my home".
63

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:27:29
Bruce Forsyth of the Lothian and Border Didnt they do well society said "Didnt they do well" ?

Now put your pants back on harry and get out the house for flips sake.
64

The Judge,

14/04/2009 13:28:57
Another case of smoke & mirrors.

Steve can you tell us how much the tramLINE to no-where is going to cost and where the money is coming from?

Steve can you tell us when the tramLINE to no-where will be open and how much the tickets will cost?

Steve can you tell us how the "integrated" tramLINE to no-where will work if the buses are banned from one of the major tramLINE routes?
65

Jams,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 13:28:59
#41 - I think you will find they were Macadam roads not tarmac roads as tar was hardly the norm in the late 1700's. The earliest forms date to around 1830's and were not widely used until the 1900's. If you are going to criticise others for a lack of knowledge you should make sure your own is adequate.

Overall though can I ask for a show of hands if anyone is surprised by this development? I think it has always been the game plan although I do have some sympathy with #36 - the council have never got over losing the Congestion Charging vote (twice) and are not mature enough to move on.

One side effect of the diversions and other work is that the road surface in Edinburgh is now being systematically destroyed. Damage which will take tens of years and millions of pounds to make good. Oh yes and guess who will be footing the bill?
66

Big bob 79,

14/04/2009 13:29:48
#61
Dont be silly Lothian Buses are making a fortune, 75 Brand new buses on the road this month!!!.... and even more being tendered for
Thats after the council raised the cash they wanted each year from 2 million to 5 million, Lothian are rolling in cash, far from a struggling company!
67

reincarnated,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 13:32:11
What a wonderful idea.

So when you get off the tram (if they ever start running) you need to walk up to George St or beyond to get a bus.
68

reincarnated,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 13:32:44
Stop it all nowwwwwww!!!!
69

Marathon,

14/04/2009 13:34:54
#31 Big Bob. Since we're being pedantic, I suggest you pay attention to the fact that the big square thing at the east end of George Street is called "St Andrew Square".
70

Bill MacD,

14/04/2009 13:35:17
Excellent news. We need to turn our city back into a living space for the many rather than tolerate its being ruined and dominated by a few selfish drivers of the type who sound off so loudly here.
71

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:36:30
You are a good man Bill and you think right.
72

Ron D,

Enybru 14/04/2009 13:38:09
Ban cars from the entire city centre.
73

Marathon,

14/04/2009 13:40:00
You live in South Edinburgh and choose to get a bus into town to visit Debenhams. You jump on a bus, and get off the bus on Princes Street opposite Debenhams.

Tie come along....

You live in South Edinburgh and choose to get a bus into town to visit Debenhams. You jump on a bus, and get off on George Street, then walk five minutes to Debenhams.

Tell me exactly how that is a benefit to anybody? What about those bus users who have no interest in the tram, who are mobility impaired?

On Princes Street, buses have no interaction with cars. On George Street they do.

I'm at a loss.
74

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 13:44:23
#75 Unless you're very lucky indeed, you're going to need to walk at least 5 minutes from your house to the bus stop in South Edinburgh, aren't you? So the 5 minutes from George St to Princes St isn't going to be a challenge.
75

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 13:45:27
75 What you have just described is of course applicable to everyone .

Strangely, the world isnt all about you.
76

Big bob 79,

14/04/2009 13:48:39
# 75

BUY A BIKE!......
77

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 13:53:48
#39:

"lets just put everything back the way it was" isnt going to happen now is it ?


Maybe not. But until it does, Edinburgh is going to be a nightmare.
78

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 14:01:14
The bonkers legacy of David Begg and his disciples continue apace.
79

Statsman,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:01:26
The council is completely out of touch with reality. They are all fruitcakes.
80

Sas,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:03:29
I drive a car, probably more than I really need to, but I really can't go along with the paranoid delusions of those posting here who see all this as an "anti-motorist" vendetta, especially as cars haven't been able to use Princes Street for the most part in recent years anyway.

The road lobby, who've had it all their own way for the majority of the post-war years now cry "foul" when the tide partially turns and try to portray "motorists" as some poor downtrodden minority, being attacked by the evil forces of world-dominating cyclists.

For a few people, a car is a necessity, for most of us (me included) it's a luxury. Oh, and I'd rather be hit by a bike than a car if I'm walking on Princes Street.
81

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 14:05:02
20 yep and the rest of Scotland will have to cough up for this nonsense.
82

Columba doing the Rumba,

14/04/2009 14:06:01
Pedestrianising Glasgow city centre hasn't stopped people from shopping there.
83

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 14:06:15
82 - hit by a bike ? chances are this'll happen on an Embra PAVEMENT.
84

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 14:06:55
save the planet (yawn)
85

Julian.,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:14:06
Duncan,

And the mobility impaired that he mentioned?

Isn't that one of the main purposes of public transport? To take the elderly and infirm who don't have other means of transport direct to places like Princes Street?
86

Statsman,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:14:39
Labour = Idiots - Supported trams etc.

SNP = Idiots - Cheerleading trams and street closures

Lib Dems = Idiots - Supported trams etc.

Conservatives = Idiots - Supported trams etc.

Greens = Idiots - Supported trams etc.

Who am I meant to vote for? There doesn't appear to be an opposition party in Edinburgh. It's like the Soviet Union where you got a choice of Communist apparatchiks to vote for.
87

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 14:19:53
What would jesus do ?

Vote Jesus. He loves all forms of transport. especially the sandal and the tumbling egg.
88

Big bob 79,

14/04/2009 14:21:04
#87
The main purposes of public transport is to make MONEY!......
89

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 14:31:29
#87 Erm, no, it isn't. What a strange idea.

Most folk, happily, are able to walk 5 minutes to and from a bus stop. For those that aren't, provision should be, and is being, made. Mobility aids, disabled parking privileges, free taxis, community transport services - all these are available to those who need them.
90

PaulB,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:36:00
I had to laugh at Eric's comment much earlier about Glasgow and it's (miniature) subway being superior to Edinburgh. That will be the same city where the local evening paper currently have a major campaign to get the city moving - apparently it is clogged with traffic all day. Any response Eric?
91

Snowy_Owl,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:40:54
Princes St trams
92

,

14/04/2009 14:42:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

The Gonk,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:44:51
Why not? Ban all traffic I say.

Perhaps this would give the Silver Man more room to practice and he might actually become decent

94

JFW,

not the same Edinburgh that the Cardownie is in 14/04/2009 14:51:07
I'm all for a pedestrianised Princes St but to claim that the 'diversions' are working well is unbelievable. Have they bothered to look at George St, or every other street outside the city centre that folks are using to get around the trouble when they used to be able to come down the mound. It is nigh on impossible to leave the New Town area by car during the day the traffic is so bad. Lots of major streets closed for no good reason (Broughton St closure still to come - OMG!!), London Road to Leith walk at a complete standstill and all alternative roads closed. The tram works are a disgrace but what is worse is the amount of unrelated major roadworks going on that prevents people finding viable alternative routes. I am all for preventing folks from driving into the city but at the moment you can't drive anywhere around the city without hitting major problems. Back to a pedestrianised Princes St - where are the buses going to go? George St is not a viable long term option - it should be pedestrianised too, but then that means Queen St will be a nightmare so folks will starting driving through the New Town to avoid it all and then all hell breaks loose. The cynic in me is wondering is this leading back to another congestion charging situation where it will suddenly become the lesser of two evils?
95

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 14:55:57
#96 He was talking about the bus diversions from Princes St, not the car diversions from the Mound.

It is certainly unfortunate that alongside the trams there is the biggest gas mains replacement project for decades, and a series of roundabouts being converted to traffic lights.

We need to reduce car use, not divert it. That is why light rail schemes like the trams are so important in the public transport mix.
96

E. Rid L,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 14:57:56
who in their right mind would want to cycle in town, Im a keen cyclist, but I value my life more than cycling in town, or anywhere that there is heavy traffic. We have one of the best bus services into town not so good out in the sticks, where cyclists should be enjoying the country side.

If Princes street is going to be pedestians only then no bikes please you can still be run over with a bike.

#5 the men in orange jackets do a very important job they are supporting the one man thats working to ensure that he is kept safe from not working to hard, and suppling drinks and fags!!!!!
97

E. Rid L,

14/04/2009 15:02:29
Here's a better idea why don't we all stay out of Edinburgh for a month not shopping not parking and see how long it takes the council to realise that we need traffic in Edinburgh, think how much car parking revenue that they would lose, and still have to pay parking attendants, when they are made redundant we all head back to town. What do you think?
98

Eliz,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 15:06:52
Princes Street would not be "closed to traffic". Lines of muckle great trams and demented cyclists would be just as dangerous. Ban those as well and it might make sense. In fact, just ban the tram and let's have peace in our world.
99

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 15:14:21
#99 Why not just come by bus? Same effect on the council's coffers with the loss of parking revenue, but no impact on what you want to do shopping-wise.
100

E. Rid L,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 15:26:02
#101 good point, but do what I do shop online it's brill no hassle, or better still shop when Im working!!!
101

antifa,

14/04/2009 15:26:53
"Stop it all nowwwwwww!!!!"

This pretty much sums up the average Edinburgher's approach to life.
102

Statsman,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 15:28:00
101 Duncan in Edinburgh

The council owns well over 90% of the local bus company. Profits go to them.

To protest against the undemocratic council, you have to give them as little money as possible.

Even the Judas SNP now support trams at a local level - a view not shared by the majority of the electorate.
103

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 15:33:42
#104 For someone calling himself Statsman, you are yet again playing fast and loose with statistics.

How have you assessed the electorate's views on the trams? It wasn't, by any chance, via the time-tested method of simply believing your own view to be shared by everyone else?
104

Non-PC.... its easy as 1,2,3,

14/04/2009 15:35:48
I say go for it. Less people shop in edinburgh compared to other cities because of the crossing of roads, pavements overcrowded etc. Plus theres not enough room to dodge the numerous studenty charity workers that want to 'chat' to you and your wallet. Probably the most dangerous road to cross as well. Must be someone with enough time to have made a survey compiling the most traffic accidents on one street. I'd take a guess at the winner.
105

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 15:36:31
#102 So you mean that your entire post at #99 was a fabrication, that you don't actually drive into town now to do your shopping, and that therefore your rallying cry to protest against the council was no more than hot air?

What a surprise.
106

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 15:38:54
One thing that can be proven here is that quite a large majority of the human race are stupid and self serving.

107

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 15:41:09
hurray ! Johnston press share price now 10p !
108

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 15:41:48
108 Whats even worse is that they think people in charge will listen to their stupid and self serving arguments.

This is generally not the case.
109

go boil ur heid,

14/04/2009 15:47:05
quite right Herr Cowdownie take off the buses and only allow healthy young people to walk the honourable streets of princess.
110

totally indecent,

14/04/2009 15:50:06
109- Why are you cheering? Were they not more than that when you bought them?
111

nSyratzcGlaw,

14/04/2009 15:50:50
8p when i bought them.
112

WallaceJohn,

- www.juryteam.org 14/04/2009 15:55:14
What about the elderly, infirm and the disabled in our community who may want to go to shops in Princes Street.
113

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 15:57:18
#114 They should feel free to do so.
114

Andrew,

14/04/2009 16:28:34
SUPERB! HOORAY! WONDERFUL! LONG OVERDUE for CONSIDERATION! DING-DING TRAM!! TRING-TRING BIKE!! Just hope the (push) bikes don't get 'stuck in a rut' on the tram lines!
115

Statsman,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 16:37:20
105 Duncan in Edinburgh

We were never allowed a vote.

However, a recent poll in the EEN showed 75% against the tram.
116

FF,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 16:40:14
Mr Cardownie hasn't thought this through. Edinburgh city centre only has three drivable roads going East/West. banishing buses from Princes Street means congestion on George Street and not one street free of traffic.

Much better to keep the buses on Princes Street and make George Street completely pedestrianised - and not the half-baked solution the previous regime came up with.
117

JFW,

New Town 14/04/2009 16:46:27
I agree #118; if we have trams on Princes St then better to let buses and bikes along there too and pedestrianise George St instead.
118

Bob Wilson,

Anchor Man 14/04/2009 16:47:59
Pedestrianisation only works when you have shops on both side of the street.

Turn Princes street into a pedestrian precinct and you'll end up doing is filling the empty un-used space with all the sc um and ner-do-wells from Hunter square
119

Save the employees,

Somewhere other than Princes Street 14/04/2009 16:53:56
Wonder what the Princes Street shops think of this?

I guess when they all go bankrupt we knock them all down and merge George Street with Princes Street
120

FF,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 17:04:53
#121. Unlikely. Buchanan Street in Glasgow is completely pedestrianised and is the most valuable shopping street in Scotland. (ie it has the highest rents because it's the most desirable place to open a shop).

The fact is, motorists don't buy things; pedestrians do.
121

archie12,

14/04/2009 17:05:57
It seems to me that the cycling lobby want everything -Presumably they want Princes Street pedestrianised but that cyclists would be exempt; they want to be able to take cycles on to the trams; they want more special lanes for cyclists in Edinburgh; and I hear on the news that they want to be exempted from red lights in London (sure to spread nationwide. Just how far do they now wish to go with cycling proposals?
In the Princes Street issue, do the council intend that after dark and through the night, no vehicular traffic at all? That will sure not prevent issues like Fear of Crime to have a "dead" streetscape with no trams either.
How do shops with no loading facilities in the Rose Street South Lanes re-stock? By parachute?
Will there be exemptions for others like disabled people who can't "enjoy" Duncan's walk from the bus? Maybe they can't walk!!
How about emergency vehicles? Emergency only or routine patrols as well? Cops on cycles? Paramedics on bikes?
122

Cauld Lad Hylton,

14/04/2009 17:13:51
Then what happens to the central parking in George Street!!!!

You guessed it - GONE

Nil Desperandum
123

Euan,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 17:19:48
#123

Some good points, especially about the loading of goods into shops which don't have rear access from Rose Street. The parachute option may well be the only way..

As usual, silly thoughts are bandied about by foolhardy individuals and lobby groups like Spokes before any common sense has been applied to them, sadly, much like the entire tram project.

I wonder what businesses and residents on George Street think about todays harebrained ideas?

Hmmmm, not much I reckon..

124

One-man-bucket's older twin,

14/04/2009 17:24:13
Duncan @ #91 - 'Most folk, happily, are able to walk 5 minutes to and from a bus stop. For those that aren't, provision should be, and is being, made. Mobility aids, disabled parking privileges, free taxis, community transport services - all these are available to those who need them.'
What evidence do you have that any disabled person gets a free taxi? You can get a taxi card that is only worth using if your journey costs less than £5. Community transport services have to be booked in advance, so no spontaneous freedom of movement for those with chairs or walking aids.
You really don't know everything - take your own advice about keeping your mouth shut.
125

Euan,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 17:29:06
#126

Well said.

Duncan is so full of his own trumped-up bile, he fails to keep a grasp on reality, hence the complete drivel which spills from his mouth.
126

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 17:42:54
98 as long as the cyclists avoid the A71, there's enough 2 wheeled loons on that as it is.
127

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 17:44:33
108 - ye don't say !!!
128

Maxibus,

14/04/2009 17:46:18
Many cities have trams and nearly all have pedestrianised streets, it's quite easy to do.
There was no Golden Age for traffic in Edinburgh. Even before the tram works there was conjestion and accidents.
Let's all be patient and wait for the real Golden Age the age of the tram and the pedestrian.
129

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 17:47:45
117 - they're scared in case they get a similar result to that of Andrew Burns's congestion tax poll !
130

oiler,

14/04/2009 17:48:01
The quicker cars are banned from the city centre the better.
I cycle there often and to be quite frank , most drivers up town are total knobbers.(bus and taxi drivers included)
They seem to think they have a god given right to the road and act accordingly (like tubes)
And before you all start , I drve a huge 4x4 , sports car and run half a dozen bikes including vintage 2 strokes so its not some loony enviro rant its simply that driving in town seems to make most people into idiots as soon as they can see the Scott monument

131

StuartM,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 17:49:17
Spokesman says "At the moment, there's no need to dodge buses or taxis".

On the 'new street' you'd need to dodge the bikes as cyclists are so rude in this city. They run red lights constantly, despite the road lines being repainted to give them a special box in front of all the traffic. They also sail through pedestrian crossings on red, almost taking out pedestrians following the green cross code.

Once again an unelected group is being listened to whilst the electorate are being ignored. Imagine carting a suitcase from Waverley station to catch a city bus. You then have to drag it all the way up to George Street. These plans are daft. Clearly Cardownie never takes the bus.
132

,

14/04/2009 17:49:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
133

archie12,

14/04/2009 17:50:51
#132 ...... and the first pedestrian or cyclist knocked down by a tram will involve a closure of the line and investigations by the Railway Inspectorate, Police, Council H&S Transport man, Councillors demanding to know what happened etc etc. etc. and guess what? Following trams won't be able to drive round the scene .... no more "just exchange names and move along, sir"
134

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 17:50:59
122 - motorists aren't welded to their cars, they leave the cars in shopping mall car parks and go and shop ! Doh !
135

Seb,

14/04/2009 17:51:45
Duncan, where do you get the info that New Town Streets were originally tarmac? Both Naysmith's painting (1825) and Kay's (1814) show setts on Princes Street....
136

StuartM,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 17:54:09
Oh yeah, where's Wheeler? I thought he was transport spokesman? or are the SNP trying to make the policy whilst the Fib Dems lie back and accept it.
137

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 17:55:18
134 - I trust you aint one the substantial number of Embra cyclists who see fit to regard pavements as part of their track ?
138

FF,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 18:03:52
#138. Motorists get out of their cars, so they are now pedestrians. Doh!

Shops want lots of "pedestrians" to make money out of them - so create an attractive environment for them.

And the last time I looked, Princes Street isn't a shopping mall car park.
139

oiler,

14/04/2009 18:04:23
141- Nope. I try and stick to the rules as much as poss but some folk will make it impossible for you.
The abuse I get when taking up position at the front of the traffic at lights has to seen and heard to be believed!!. I often wonder if they would be happy with themselves if they did manage to kill someone just because they cant control their temper.
140

Pilrig,

Livingston 14/04/2009 18:13:01
142 maybe that's why Princes Street is struggling trade-wise. In fact who needs to shop in central Embra - unless you're going to a specialist shop - when you can come to dear young Livi or the Gyle ?
141

wolfette,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 18:17:11
I would not like to be a cyclist in a tramway. Ask old cyclists what happens when you get your front wheel stuck in a tramline.

142

FF,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 18:24:55
Pilrig, not necessarily. As I have already said, Buchanan Street in Glasgow, totally pedestrianised, is the richest shopping street in Scotland. I think Edinburgh City Centre suffers from a lack of imagination and decent planning. There's no point in creating another Almondvale shopping centre in Princes Street, even if you wanted to. There just isn't enough road space to carry the motorists in. Something has to give. It's clear to me that pedestrians and public transport should get priority over private cars.

That way people get a choice: they can either take a bus or walk into town, or they can drive to the Gyle or Livingston.
143

Sas,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 18:26:28
#127 Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they're spouting bile. I think you're getting confused with some of the personal comments being aimed AT Duncan (e.g. 'witty' comment #136).

Anyone putting a contrary opinion to the received wisdom that trams are the worst thing to happen to Edinburgh since the plague is routinely pilloried. It's a pathetic kind of mob rule.
144

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 18:27:18
#126 Thanks for that. My point was, and remains, that buses are not designed to deliver disabled people - or anyone else -on door-to-door journeys. Very few people are lucky/unlucky enough to live right next to a bus stop, or to have bus stops right next to where they need to go. It is assumed that bus users have to walk to bus stops. The argument that moving buses to George St creates a 5 minute walk is therefore bogus. That was my point, and your gratuitous insults don't change it.
145

Sas,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 18:27:55
#145 That'll be why nobody cycles in Amsterdam.......
146

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 18:27:58
#127 Very persuasive. The other boys on the playground must be very impressed by you.
147

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 18:29:34
#130 I'm fully aware of that. How hard is it to understand that what I'm saying isn't "screw the disabled", it's that bus stops cannot be exactly where one travels to or from, and it has aye been the case.
148

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 18:32:17
#139 Seb, I think that Princes St was indeed setted in the early 1800s; but the New New Town (i.e. the later part outwith the George St stretch) was not, and the majority of setts in the New Town today are in that part and were added later to give "character".
149

tumshie heid,

14/04/2009 18:32:57
Duncan, he who knows it all has gone strangely quiet on the subject of setts/tarmac. Perhaps its because he has yet again been found to be talking cobblers.
150

Seb,

14/04/2009 18:44:51
Duncan, what are you basing the statement that " the majority of setts in the New Town today are in that part and were added later to give "character"." on?
151

Ecce,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 18:56:46
If the cycling lobby is so concerned for pedestrians, maybe they should have a word with some of their number who endanger the good folk of Easter Road by riding along the pavements.
152

FF,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 19:08:06
#158. So Edinburgh becomes Livingston? Cunning plan!
153

Snails dont like curry and chips,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 19:36:09
Brilliant - a dead and empty city centre apart from the muggers, beggars, knifers and any other ner-do-wells that want to go there. Really looking forward to this utopian vision!!!! Not!!!!!!
154

Diana,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 19:36:30
They're well on their way to making Edinburgh city centre a ghost town - go for it. These people are complete morons - the only reason the diversions have been "successful" is that people are avoiding driving through the city centre.

It's going to be a long time before I'm mad enough to shop there.
155

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 19:40:28
Oiler:

With all that experience, I would have thought that you'd be able to deal with a little bit of traffic without moaning like a spoilt schoolboy.

Seems you are quite happy to drive around in 4x4s and motorbikes when it suits you, but as soon as you get on your push-bike, woe betide anyone who dares to drive on the same road as you.

Coping with traffic is all about skill and being prepared to deal with the unexpected.
156

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 19:43:31
#143:

Maybe if you didn't insist on pushing your way to the front of the queue, then holding everything else up, you wouldn't get the abuse. Think about it. Start reading the situation.
157

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 19:58:31
#155 On what I have been told by wiser heads than mine, Seb.
158

oiler,

14/04/2009 20:16:41
High octane , you are quite wrong.
I am allowed an opinion without being a "spoiled schoolboy" 25yrs driving entitles me to one.

No, woe betide anyone who hurts me because they drive like an ersepiece.

Enough years on motorbikes to have plenty skill.Probably a lot more than some eh!!

Using a cyle lane to get to an area reserved for cylists is not "pushing your way" if the safest place for me is in front of you instead of being stuck in the middle of a bunch of unskilled unattentive vegetables with cars then thats where I`ll be.

Any more??
159

One-man-bucket's older twin,

14/04/2009 20:19:29
Duncan # 148 I am so sorry, I forgot that YOU are allowed to make hypocritical and insulting comments, but if someone criticises you, it's 'not fair'. Are you really Kevin the Teenager in disguise? If you can't take it, don't dish it out. And if you persist in stating your opinions as fact, you must expect to be mocked. If your point was that buses are not for disabled people, then make it, without going on to spout verbal diarrhoea about something you clearly know nothing about.
160

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 20:25:51
#164:

Like I say, you should be able to read the road and make allowances in order to make safe progress.

Riding a push-bike down the inside of a queue of traffic is not necessarily the safest thing to do, due to the possibility of someone making a left turn in front of you. Forcing your way to the front of the queue, then holding other traffic up is antagonistic and is likely to result in problems.

Doing that kind of thing on a motorbike, when you have ample power to leave everyone standing is one thing.

The cycle lanes in this city are badly designed and are basically put there in order to encourage cyclists to hold up other traffic---in other words to cause conflict, which I think you will agree is never a good thing.

I also find that other road users are incompetent and do silly things---most notably driving too slowly, dithering, not signalling correctly and not paying attention. However, rather than moaning about it and calling for bans/restrictions/traffic calming etc, I get on with it and deal with it.
161

Pond Hall,

14/04/2009 20:26:21
162 AHCFD

Its a pity that car drivers started reading the situation, I'm no perfect road user, as there is no such thing

But can you explain why some car drivers overtake cyclists (inc myself) and then slam on the brakes and make a left hand turn OR start to overtake and then pull in, because there is a car coming the other way on the other side of the road.

as you say "maybe they should start reading the situation."

anyway what was this story about?
162

Pond Hall,

14/04/2009 20:33:15
the biggest problem with cycle lanes is the number of people that insist on parking in them.

Only last week I witnessed "driver" parking his car in cycle lane at Peak times (ie no parking) approaching a busy junction

Watching as he got out his car, FAG in one hand and Mobile in the other, the door slowly swinging open,
The wind caught the door as an unfortunate motorist went past to avoid the car and result, one mirror off and scraped door.
The traffic warden on the motorbike was off like a light

anyway what was this story about?
163

oiler,

14/04/2009 20:35:03
High octane- we are talking about the city centre here where there is very little need for car access anyway.
Residents permits and delivery access aside , why do people need to drive there in the first place.
Vist York and see how pleasant a car free city centre can be.

And this is from a confirmed driver as I`ve already said.
The simple fact is, a city centre is no place for an ego behind a wheel and unfortunately that is what most drivers up the toon have become.
164

Charles MN,

14/04/2009 20:35:34
#152 Duncan

I think you will find that large parts of the the new town were setted either when they were built or shortly afterwards. Try reading this:

http://download.edinburgh.gov.uk/Edinburgh_Standards_for_Streets/Edinburgh_Standards_for_Streets_App1.pdf

165

Seb,

14/04/2009 20:35:59
#163 Duncan, ah, hearsay. While some streets may have been macadamed (not tarmac) it was an inferior finish to setts which covered most streets in the NT as they were built or retrofitted if not.
166

is it me?,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 21:01:17
I know I've said it before, but, this would be fine if they'd done this to begin with, and pinched a bit off the Gardens; sheet piled it; infilled it; and laid the tramline on it.
Result; no contractual underground surprises, and a proper pedestrian area between the the buildings and the trams.
167

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 21:06:23
#170 Thanks Charles, that's a fascinating read. It does seem to partially support my prior understanding, making clear that while some New Town streets were setted upon being built, others were not. There are a range of streets in the New Town which have never had setts, and there are others whose setts are a relatively recent addition; there are also some where setts are now covered by a modern road surface.

#171 I'm not convinced that "most" is the right word, Seb; from what I have read and been told, some of what are seen as traditionally setted streets today were not finished like that until the late 19th century. I need to dig out some of my old Edinburgh books and find a reference.
168

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 21:08:50
#165 I'm sorry you weren't able to understand my original post, and even more sorry that you are apparently unable to communicate without abuse. Perhaps you ought to have a lie down.
169

is it me?,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 21:08:57
#171
I see you've been influenced by that student at #66.
Everyone knows that Macadam's first name was Tarquin, which he embarassedly shortened to Tar.
Hence tarmacadam.

p.s. Mr Smartypants #66. The correct term is bitumen macacam.
170

is it me?,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 21:09:46
...or Macadam.
171

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 21:13:26
#167:

"as you say "maybe they should start reading the situation."

Correct. And thinking. And that applies to ALL road users.

#169:

"High octane- we are talking about the city centre here where there is very little need for car access anyway"

I disagree. You should be free to use the transport of your choice.
172

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2009 21:15:37
#177 Then we're going to need a lot more heliports and runways.
173

Seb,

14/04/2009 21:24:33
#Duncan, please do find the reference as I can't find anything to suggest the majority of NT streets were tarmac until the Victorians setted them but am happy to be shown evidence otherwise....
174

is it me?,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 21:28:24
#178 Duncan
Now you're really thinking.
Wouldn't Princes St. make a great runway?
Land right in the city centre; buy your tartan tat and depart. Without clogging the city centre up with other pointless means of transport. Including bikes.
Bikes are for back streets.
Why do they have to insist on being in the way all the time ?
175

Pond Hall,

14/04/2009 21:48:16
177 HO

yip it sure would be great if all road users observed the highway code.

just think no need for traffic calming, speed cameras and an end to road rage.
176

Euan,

Edinburgh 14/04/2009 22:15:33
Duncan.

The foolish and irrelevant posts you create continue to flood and clog-up this forum day after day.

You really are one of the most boring, uninteresting, smug and clearly out of touch individuals that I have ever had the displeasure to correspond with on these pages.

You simply cannot accept any criticism from anyone and feel that you are able to look down on other people whilst they cannot look down on you.

Not only this, but your support for Edinburgh's tram project marks you out as a complete scoundrel and a fake; a man (if indeed you are a man) with a clear and incomprehensible lack of respect for local citizens and businesses.

Duncan, you are nothing more than a fool, a slimy, unintelligent fool; a blot on the landscape if there ever was one.



177

krusty the klown,

14/04/2009 22:20:29
#180 Bikes don't insist on anything, because they're bikes. Anyways, the reason the riders of bikes are 'in the way' is because they're always quicker in town - so essentially they are ahead and 'in your way'. Shame
178

snoopy,

Musselburgh 14/04/2009 22:24:16
Why don't they just serve notice on all the traders whilst they're at it?

If this goes ahead Edinburgh will be even more of a ghost town than it already is!

Stupid idea. That happens and I'll go elsewhere for my shopping.
179

Ian down under,

Musselburgh 14/04/2009 22:24:30
I see lots of references to the problem of shutting Princes St to through traffic. Was that not why they built the bypass?
Anyway The new town was built in the 18th century and expanded in the 19th, before cars so it was never designed for them.
Pedestrianisation would be fantastic for the tourist trade and it might just rejuvenate the shops, they way it seems to do everywhere else. Mind you it won't work in Edinburgh because as we are told trams work well everywhere else but can never work here because of some unique feature which I have never heard a credible explanation for. Interesting the buses are causeing George St to crack and collapse and we were led to believe that trams were responsible for cracking and collapsing roads. Perhaps we can now see that the under-road services were going to need to be replaced tramway or not.
Mind you I would still look at putting the tramway under Princes St, on the Gardens side with big windows on the side so that the passengers could still get a good view of the castle.A service access road could be put in at the same time on the shop side under the pavement.
180

lulach mac gille coemgain,

14/04/2009 22:53:28
City chiefs?
181

lulach mac gille coemgain,

14/04/2009 22:55:44
I was hearing some good suggestions from the Anarchists Chamber of Commerce the other day about an orderly march ?
182

Julian.,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 23:05:54
Statsman,

"However, a recent poll in the EEN showed 75% against the tram"

Ahh, now we have it. The scientific basis of your evidence is an EEN poll. That wasn't one of the ones where you "click here" if you're against trams? Did it ever occur to you that some people might be able to click more than once? Did it not also occur to you that those taking part were not a truly representative sample of the whole Edinburgh population?
183

Julian.,

edinburgh 14/04/2009 23:10:47
Euan,

Maybe Duncan's a bit smug. But at least he doesn't resort to torrents of personal abuse to make his point.

Personally, I thought his comment about heliports and runways was a first class retort:-)
184

22shifter,

edinburgh 15/04/2009 09:11:29
The real reason for this is that they know fine well that trying to run the present volume of buses along Princes st with the trams would be an operational nightmare.
Thats why in the computer images of trams running along Princes st there is'nt another vehicle in sight!
The cycling lobby stuff is just a convienient smokescreen.
185

Happy H,

Edinburgh 15/04/2009 14:31:18
Apologies if this comment has already been made:

I have been back about five years now after an absence of 10. When I lived here before, working near Charlotte Sq, there were very few traffic restrictions apart from Rose Street and Young/Hill/Thistle Streets. Everything seemed to flow fine except for a rush 30-45 minutes at either end of the working day.

Numbers of cars have increased but I am a firm believer that returning to a mainly open traffic system would improve traffic flow in the city centre. This would significantly reduce the pollution at the same time.

I assume that the common sense approach - treat people like grown-ups and they are more likely to behave like them - is not possible!?

Why can't these jobsworths stop interfering and fiddling around with one way streets, junction closures, road closures, bus route changes and just let all city dwellers get on with their lives?
186

JFW,

15/04/2009 15:17:17
#191 - It has been proven without doubt that when you create extra road-space traffic levels increase to fill it, so in no time you're back to square one. I'm afraid restrictions are required as most people are just too lazy to get out of their cars.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Should the pavements on Princes Street be dug up once tram works are done?
Yes - what’s a few more months? Let’s make it perfect
No - businesses and shoppers have suffered enough misery
No - there’s no justification for the additional costs

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.