Welcome

WELCOME  -- tramnishambles carries on regardless??

Latest news: A news report 'Two studies one Fib" just pulling togther some facts from NHS review and a Daily mail report on the effects of traffic created air pollution in respect of deaths caused,  and asthma type illnesses particularly in young children.

The two studies in the reports are from respected sources--the one fib is the Council's own.

The fib is:  The tram is not the direct cause of rising traffic pollution and poorer air quality in the city for years ahead---the traffic is to blame..

  • They KNEW in 2003 that building it as

TWO studies, ONE Fib

The NHS Review already a year old, of the issue of deaths from air pollution  (they are not focussing on the illnesses -- for a reference to a more recent study on illnesses caused, and in particular Childhood asthma from this year see here), perhaps the biggest 'lie' that the Council are happy to see broadcast about the tram project is the one that says the rising pollution in the city is 'the traffic's fault'....... AND that '...at least, the tram will do something to reduce it."

Alongside the attempt to say it's 'all down to road traffic', is the one that runs: "And at least the Tram is

144 Change we can, change we must

Review of the connections between Council cover-ups? or unanswered questions across a decade.

Edinburgh Tram Council Officers Report into options 23-06-2011

The report first produced by Council Officers and departments to provide advice to Councillors following the  acknowledgement of the final collapse of the original project to build the whole of Phase one.

This was supposed to be the impartial assesment of options by officers, with three possibilities considered: Full abandonment, Pushing on to St Andrews square, Pausing at haymarket.

Resident's response to City Centre Vision plan from the Council

    Residents in one of the first neighbourhoods to really feel the effects of the Tram project on traffic levels have sent around a document in their own neighbourhood which may be of help to other areas starting to realise the  increased traffic they are seeing is perhaps not going to be either as temporary or as small as previous assurances from the Council may have led them to believe. 
 
Any other Community Councils and residents groups can just access this document here  , while it is a 'neighbourhood document' and so addresses specific concerns as you will see some of these concerns are

City Centre Vision residents response

A document produced by residents to detail some responses to the City of Edinburgh Council's City centre Vision plan.

An Awesome Foursome of Tram success??

It's often the case that in Regional media stories about the tram the interesting parts are not in the headline, or intro praragraphs, but are buried a little more deeply within the story.

In this latest one the 'awesome foursome' of tram project achievements 'returning to glory' the city aren't that interesting, given that any project, however badly managed will eventually reach some kind of completion (especially if £231Million gets chucked at it).

Two contributions shed a bit more light on things than the rewritten Press release sections of the story.

One from Joanna Mowat, a long

CEC Annual Transport report 2011-2012 released Jan 2013

The annual Transport Review of Edinburgh Council this one released January 15th and presented to Councillors of the Transport and Environment Committee.

Note the preamble and summary points by officers then compare with the table on page 11 of 25. middle indicator of the three, showing traffic levels down 5%

On page 12 of 25 the table shows a massive increase (the last, 11th or 11 indicators) in NO2  from 24 past the 'baseline' 27 up to 31.

The table on page 8 of 25 also shows a worrying rise in fatalities and also people seriously injured up by double digit percentages over the target,

Edinburgh twinning with Detroit??

The cascade of bad decisions now being revealed piecemeal have been inevitable for years, and clear to anyone who has looked at the plans of the tram project and various associated piecemeal traffic management proposals that have flown from it.

A whole host of 'solutions', such as the loop(y) idea mentioned in the article above, are now arriving to address the problems created by the original ill thought through, and unnecessary, tram scheme layered onto the even older 'Gehl Vision' plans.

The worst effects of the collapse of traffic planning won't be felt in the central areas from which

Pages