Skip directly to content

Border Railway v Edinburgh Tram

on Sun, 10/28/2012 - 12:07

This article is about the Borders Railway but the light it shines on the Tram project is helpful in isolating the key argument we have with our city 'railway' project.

In the comments one person, Pedro de Orgiva,  made a very good point (at least it seemed okay to me) in the context of criticism that it may cost more than expected to build 

Interesting that 70% of the potential users will come from the upper income quartile. If this is true then it will really will remove a sizable no of vehicles from the A7, since these are the very people who will be commuting at the moment by car. This group are unlikely to use buses because of their perceived downmarket image so simply putting on more buses will do nothing to address transport problems. The new railway will almost certainly make the central borders much more attractive as a place to relocate to for professionals, which can only be good news for the many small service businesses struggling at the moment in the borders. 
The trains cannot come soon enough.

This isn't just a good comment in itself , it also highlights an improtant point that is at the heart of the difference betwene this 'rail' project and our 'rail' project; the Tram.

This project may cost more than expected (almost certainly will) BUT the key difference is there is no proposal to build the track along the bypass roads around the villages and communities on the route!!

Ensuring that any reduction in the overall  traffic flow of vehicles will be inconsequential compared to the cascade of bad effects caused by sending the traffic through the village streets and residential areas and increasing their levels enormously---and of course the poster isn't expecting any freight, lorry, van traffic to 'go by train'.

Our biggest problem is that the desperate planning flaws within the tram project, this movement of traffic off  our 'bypasses' and into our 'village streets' is simply not addressed by the Council---in the early years it was camouflaged by the use of the term 'wider issues', because they are frightened to address it..

They have no good answers and no meaningful solutions so the council carry on regardless, making pretty general comments about 'two rails good' and 'four wheels bad' , while compounding a problem that all scientific evidence treats as an increasingly serious one, for what seems to be no other reason than it would be too much trouble to do so.




Post new comment