Edinburgh tram goes live tomorrow!

[Swervin_Mervin]

How are they getting stuck? Don't they have priority signalling? Or are they running with traffic on some sections?

[Halmyre]

Art0ir said:

HarryFlatters said:

I take it that you've never had to try to get out of the Gyle business park at 5pm? It wasn't great before, now it's a car park from half 4 until half 6, and it's worse if there's any incident on either the A71, M8 or the city bypass.

Don't say that, I work out of there for a week at a time occasionally

Besides the increased delays at Gogar, queues on Dalry Road approaching Haymarket have also been much longer during the tram test runs.

[jshell]

Swervin_Mervin said:

How are they getting stuck? Don't they have priority signalling? Or are they running with traffic on some sections?

Shandwick place approaching Princes St with buses stopped, buses pulling out, confused car drivers, lorries. It was amusing.

[TheSnitch]

HarryFlatters said:

I take it that you've never had to try to get out of the Gyle business park at 5pm? It wasn't great before, now it's a car park from half 4 until half 6, and it's worse if there's any incident on either the A71, M8 or the city bypass.

I'm neither for the trams, nor am I against. What I am against though, is gargantuan fk-ups that cost billions of pounds of taxpayer's money when there was a clearly cheaper solution available. A poster earlier in the thread the nail on the head... the railway line to Fife passes literally 20 feet away from the airport's boundary fence. TIE could have spend a tenth of the tram's final bill upgrading the lines and building a station and achieved much the same effect any not pissed off a quarter of a million people in the process.

At the risk of sounding like an old fart, it's a crying bloody shame that the politicians and planners of the 1960's did not possess the foresight to see that closing 55% of railway lines, together with increased car ownership would cause such congestion on our roads that what we really need back is the 55% of railway miles they got shot of. Putting all their resources and investment into a core of main routes was also a winner, wasn't it? As evidenced by the fact that when the line was washed away at Dawlish in the winter storms there was no alternative route, essentially cutting Cornwall and most of Devon from the rail network.

It's not just better public transport we need - it also needs to be properly integrated, otherwise it either becomes a white elephant or using it becomes a total pain in the arse

[Leithen]

TheSnitch said:

At the risk of sounding like an old fart, it's a crying bloody shame that the politicians and planners of the 1960's did not possess the foresight to see that closing 55% of railway lines, together with increased car ownership would cause such congestion on our roads that what we really need back is the 55% of railway miles they got shot of. Putting all their resources and investment into a core of main routes was also a winner, wasn't it? As evidenced by the fact that when the line was washed away at Dawlish in the winter storms there was no alternative route, essentially cutting Cornwall and most of Devon from the rail network.

It's not just better public transport we need - it also needs to be properly integrated, otherwise it either becomes a white elephant or using it becomes a total pain in the arse

You're not sounding like an old fart, just writing common sense. It's probably the critical mistake that nobody dares mention - Beeching's cuts were no doubt necessary and justifiable, however it was the subsequent decision, or lack of decision/foresight regarding the redundant network that can now be seen as a disaster.

We are a small island with high population density - you can never get back the lost network once it was broken up and disposed of.

British Waterways for whatever reason were much more clever - they mothballed their network, allowed all sorts of infrastructure to be place along it and across it and then when they decided to reinstate parts of it, they pulled out all the contracts that had clauses in them for that very eventuality which placed the cost entirely at the door at those who had services/utilities/roads that need moved.

[Swervin_Mervin]

TheSnitch said:

HarryFlatters said:

I take it that you've never had to try to get out of the Gyle business park at 5pm? It wasn't great before, now it's a car park from half 4 until half 6, and it's worse if there's any incident on either the A71, M8 or the city bypass.

I'm neither for the trams, nor am I against. What I am against though, is gargantuan fk-ups that cost billions of pounds of taxpayer's money when there was a clearly cheaper solution available. A poster earlier in the thread the nail on the head... the railway line to Fife passes literally 20 feet away from the airport's boundary fence. TIE could have spend a tenth of the tram's final bill upgrading the lines and building a station and achieved much the same effect any not pissed off a quarter of a million people in the process.

At the risk of sounding like an old fart, it's a crying bloody shame that the politicians and planners of the 1960's did not possess the foresight to see that closing 55% of railway lines, together with increased car ownership would cause such congestion on our roads that what we really need back is the 55% of railway miles they got shot of. Putting all their resources and investment into a core of main routes was also a winner, wasn't it? As evidenced by the fact that when the line was washed away at Dawlish in the winter storms there was no alternative route, essentially cutting Cornwall and most of Devon from the rail network.

It's not just better public transport we need - it also needs to be properly integrated, otherwise it either becomes a white elephant or using it becomes a total pain in the arse

It goes even further back than that. The British have a history of faddism. The latest new thing comes along and we ditch whatever went before, wholesale, rather than use the new thing in our existing way of doing things.

Water borne freight lost out to rail. Rail lost out to roads. Etc. Look into Europe and the story's so often different. Essentially we're so far behind because of mistakes made by our predecessors some 50-100 years ago.

[ninja-lewis]

simoid said:

I didn't know about that land being saved for an M8 extension through Sighthill/Saughton, interesting, thanks whoever that was it's always nice to remember previous good forward thinking by decision makers.

There were various plans over the years to build an urban motorway network in Edinburgh.

There was the 1949 Abercrombie Plan that proposed various ideas for a motorway in Princes Street Gardens.







That was the plan that led to demolishment of areas in the East End to make way for New St Andrews House, St James Centre and Greenside (now the Omni centre). The plan would've seen Princes Street pretty much rebuilt - something that almost came to pass under an later plan that would've seen a first floor walkway extend along the length of the street (the BHS building was one of the few sections built).

There was a later plan for an Inner Ring Road that would've seen Tollcross demolished, Melville Drive around the Meadows turned into a motorway and a tunnel under Calton hill. What is now the Western Approach Road would've linked to the M8 via that land at Sighthill/Saughton.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?msid=20973784271...



There are various other unbuilt motorway plans around Edinburgh, e.g. the bypass was supposed to continue beyond the Gyle Roundabout to A90 and Forth Road Bridge.

The only difference between yesteryear and today is that back then is that the Council listened when citizens told them to fk off with their plans (well, mostly - still didn't prevent the vandalism carried out by the Council and Edinburgh University in parts of the city).

[Ali G]

0a said:

As a recent Edinburgh resident, the inconvenience and overspend of the tram project is pretty much all I hear about in the city's cabs.

I'm not quite sure why putting a less flexible, monumentally expensive alternative to the bus is a good idea, but after years of inconvenience the Edinburgh tram finally "goes live tomorrow".

Summary of the fiasco here: http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-f...

Hopefully a warning to any other city that's thinking of a similar project...

I will not be there at 5am to experience the first tram.

So trams in Manchester were a failure.

As were trams in Sheffield.

Or perhaps not..

Maybe something to do with the clussterf*ck in Edinburger politics.

[simoid]

ninja-lewis said:

An education about transport future in the past.

Thanks very much for taking the time to post all that - totally seeing things in a new light now.

I always feel better about the world when I see a single carriageway road with a dual carriageway bridge built over it, so that was intriguing. Just imagine if we'd done it!

[vonuber]

Quite a lot of these problems can be traced back to the complete gutting of civil engineering departments in councils, meaning there is no expertise to advise them when it matters (or local knowledge of issues).

And nothing is changing; to take my own area (water, drainage and flooding) the implementation of SAB's is a great idea on paper, but it is completely hamstrung by a lack of money and the right technical people to implement it.
They are already 4 years overdue and there still is no firm date for it to happen. In the meantime, there is a massive black hole when it comes to drainage which means when the next floods hit who knows what will happen (well I do; a lot of places will get flooded. Again. And round and round we go).

[c7xlg]

Skightly o/t... If hants highways dept are typical of the rest if the country we are fecked... spend £10ks on pointless schemes ti reduce good safe two lane dual carriageway into dangerous traffic island single lane obstacle courses whilst tweeting about how they need more money to repair potholes. ... useless incompetents wasting public funds on self serving car hate schemes. .

[Edinburger]

Ali G said:

So trams in Manchester were a failure.

As were trams in Sheffield.

Or perhaps not..

Maybe something to do with the clussterf*ck in Edinburger politics.

I assume you mean the former Labour council?

[Swervin_Mervin]

Edinburger said:

Ali G said:

So trams in Manchester were a failure.

As were trams in Sheffield.

Or perhaps not..

Maybe something to do with the clussterf*ck in Edinburger politics.

I assume you mean the former Labour council?

Somehow that's not stopped Manchester. I don't know how mind.

[Edinburger]

This is amusing - although not if you're affected: Residents call to stop tram tannoy.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east...

[Leithen]

As a follow up to yesterday - walked out of my office at 4.45pm near the Princes Street stop and hopped off at the Ingliston Park and Ride - 38 minutes door to door. Probably quicker than the bus and a lot more pleasant.

However the A8 Glasgow Road from Ingliston to the Newbridge roundabout was packed and very slow moving. So if I was to try this public transport malarkey, I'd probably be much better off on the train from Gleneagles or Dunblane....

[anonymous-user]

Edinburger said:

simoid said:

Take it you like the trams Burger?

Yeah, I do. I was originally opposed and like most people I gawped at the delays, spiralling costs, etc.

But I like them now. A welcome improvement. Edinburgh seems more cosmopolitan, welcoming and versatile in some ways with a new modern transport option.

Good for you. I trust that you will be happy enough to pay for them too?

What was it, £750M? Maybe twice that to complete the project. FFS.

You certainly can fool some of the people most of the time, it seems.

[Edinburger]

REALIST123 said:

Good for you. I trust that you will be happy enough to pay for them too?

What was it, £750M? Maybe twice that to complete the project. FFS.

You certainly can fool some of the people most of the time, it seems.

It was a done deal when the contracts were concluded.

Ever met a civil engineer or quantity surveyor who got a job of a similar scale correct - not that I'm justifying the cost though.

[Spitfire2]

REALIST123 said:

Edinburger said:

simoid said:

Take it you like the trams Burger?

Yeah, I do. I was originally opposed and like most people I gawped at the delays, spiralling costs, etc.

But I like them now. A welcome improvement. Edinburgh seems more cosmopolitan, welcoming and versatile in some ways with a new modern transport option.

Good for you. I trust that you will be happy enough to pay for them too?

What was it, £750M? Maybe twice that to complete the project. FFS.

You certainly can fool some of the people most of the time, it seems.

Why is your nickname "Realist"? They are here now. We can't throw them back. May as well make the most of them

[vonuber]

REALIST123 said:

Good for you. I trust that you will be happy enough to pay for them too?

What was it, £750M? Maybe twice that to complete the project. FFS.

You certainly can fool some of the people most of the time, it seems.

The problem is not the tram in of itself but the poor due diligence on the project costs at inception, and probably going for the cheapest tender.

[grumbledoak]

vonuber said:

The problem is not the tram in of itself but the poor due diligence on the project costs at inception, and probably going for the cheapest tender.

No, the problem was insisting on a tram at all. Think what that money could have done for the buses.