Forum menu
What's the expression "You've made your bed..."
Edinburgh council need to suck this up and complete the project. Stopping at Haymarket I mean WTF!!
The whole project is mired in incompetence and stupidity but to now not run it along Princes Street (where they already laid the tracks!!)
Not all infrastucture projects in Scotland need to be late and over budget, the M74 was on time and within budget
althepal: your answer is probably on one of the best sites on the internet, pathetic motorways: http://pathetic.org.uk
"Best sites on the internet", that's stretching it a bit
So to summarise, government spent a lot of money, new government don't want to spend that money, government can't decide where to stop and where to start trams, construction company do piss poor job then complain they need more money, Edinburgh complains, no one else cares because it's just Edinburgh complaining again.
And Japan can get a motorway back in service ten days after a Tsunami? go figure
"Best sites on the internet", that's stretching it a bit
On the contrary. It has a clear vision, a consistent tone, a decent user experience and interface, it is comprehensive on its subject, it has a snappy URL and it's free. What else do you want?
The scandal is they are building a new bridge at all!The capacity is irrelevant - there is no room to get any more cars into edinburgh so a larger bridge just means larger queues to get into Edinburgh
brilliant idea - close the arterial route to the north east of scotland. And how do you propose that traffic to and from the north east gets in and out of edinburgh? through dunfermline and over the kincardine bridge?
What else do you want?
A tinfoil hat so the paranoia rayguns don't get me
The scandal is they are building a new bridge at all!The capacity is irrelevant - there is no room to get any more cars into edinburgh so a larger bridge just means larger queues to get into Edinburgh
brilliant idea - close the arterial route to the north east of scotland. And how do you propose that traffic to and from the north east gets in and out of edinburgh? through dunfermline and over the kincardine bridge?
Thing is the current bridge is falling down so needs to be replaced. You aren't going to replace it with a shittier bridge are you?
Saw the tram lines near Murrayfield recently. Would make quite a nice cycle track if they scrap the project.
A question to people who live in Edinburgh, Why didn't they just put a spur off the railway line which runs right past the airport to a new station at the airport? (not trolling, just curious...seems like an obvious thing to do?)
there was such a project, called Edinburgh Airport Rail Link http://www.earlproject.com/
It was pulled by the SNP as they didn't want 2 large infrastructure projects serving the airport, sadly as it has turned out it would have provided the same route service and cheaper option in the end, who'da thunk it.
I think that wasting this much money on a pointless tram line should be a criminal offence and people responsible should be punished accordingly, it is an absolute farce.
And my understanding is the lines already laid on Princes St will not actually be removed, but they will replace the tarmac around them as they put the wrong stuff down but leave them there to be removed again at a later date?
Thing is the current bridge is falling down so needs to be replaced. You aren't going to replace it with a shittier bridge are you?
I think tj's argument was that the bridge shouldn't be replaced because it adds to congestion in Edinburgh.
Typical Little Englander attitude "nothing north of me matters"
Typical Little Englander attitude "nothing north of me matters"
Or maybe he just hadn't considered it... wind your neck in.
On a happier note, The Scottish Government has stepped it. After the SNP abstained from the cooncil vote, they're now throwing some weight around by withholding money:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-14713476
Wunundredanwun! 😀
It's the New Wunundred... 8)
'Pathetic Motorways'; see, this is the beauty of tinternet, to bring you such joys of a website for arguing about mortorways! 😀
Thank you STW.
Typical Little Englander attitude "nothing north of me matters"
I think you'll find RichMTB ain't a 'little engurlander', but is actually a Scot.
I think you'll find the barb was aimed at TJ 🙂
The money spent achieving **** all in Edinburgh would have dualled the A9 to Inverness with plenty left over.
BigButSlimmerBloke - MemberThing is the current bridge is falling down so needs to be replaced. You aren't going to replace it with a shittier bridge are you?
I think tj's argument was that the bridge shouldn't be replaced because it adds to congestion in Edinburgh.
Typical Little Englander attitude "nothing north of me matters"
Nope. thats not my point at all - its that the new bridge is the wrong answer to the wrong question. Repair the existing one. Or build a different fixed link. We don't even know if the dehumidifying work is reducing breakage. Its a gentle decrease in load carrying ability anyway. It should be possible to repair the bridge anyway
A new bridge alongside the old one is no answer. all it will do is increase congestion south and north of it.
Newsnight scotland on the box tonight re. the trams. The first time I have ever shouted at a television. Party politics still getting in the way of project management I see....
The old road bridge is literally falling to bits - gaps in places where you can see to the water.
Once the new one is complete, the old one will be getting fixed.
Also, the old bridge will be used for public transport / taxis / bikes (eventually).
Konabunny, that's a cracking wee site.
The Glasgow ring road eh? Bonkers!
But Prob not as bonkers as a £1bn trainset!!
To be fair, that amount of money could prob have done a lot more than just dual ing the a9!!!
Who actually came up with this idea of bringing the trams back?, at some point someone in the council/government must have stuck their hand up and said "hang on a minute, I've got a great idea............."
Does this person still have a job?
Thing is the current bridge is falling down so needs to be replaced. You aren't going to replace it with a shittier bridge are you?
Kind of. It'll run £300 million over budget, then Labour will vote to have it terminate half way across the Forth.
I think you'll find the barb was aimed at TJ
I think it's a bit "off" when people make jabs at people based on who they are and not what they say.
Looks like we might be back to St Andrew Square again after all.
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Dramatic-Uturn-by-SNP-will.6828345.jp
The whole thing is, in the words of Malcolm Tucker, an omnishambles. I won't believe we are getting a tram until I am sitting on a real moving one.
Althepal, the bridge to nowhere in Glasgow is the one that crosses above the M8 at the Charing Cross underpass.It now has a brown office block built on it.
Apparently it was never meant to be a road bridge but was intended to be the base for an office development. It sat unused for over 20 years.
There is a footbridge, level with the Hilton, that is also known as the bridge to nowhere. Wiki says that Sustrans hope to finish the bridge as part of an easier access route to the west end of the city centre. Danny MacAskill jumped off it in the S1 jobs.com advert.
Stucol, aye, I remember the bridge before it was an office- always thought it was supposed to be a flyover tho?
The Bridge to Nowhere is the Anderston Footbridge is it not? You know, the bridge that ends up in the sky as seen here http://www.computescotland.com/glasgows-bridge-to-somewhere-541.php
Nah - that at least as one end firmly on terra firma. The Bridge to Nowhere is the one which now has the office block on it.
I'm sure that's an urban myth.
What is?
That the bridge to nowhere is the one that has the office blocks built on it.
Seriously... the bridge supports and deck were there looooong before anyone got round to putting offices on it.
St Andrews Square it is.
One assumes they'll use the square for the (unplanned/uncosted) turning circle, in which case it'll be handy for the bus station and not too far from Waverley either.
Does it need a turning circle? I thought it could drive both ways
Why would the need a turning circle? Would it not be cheaper to fit the trams with a reverse gear? Wonder how much the trams will eventually cost...
One of the issues with the Haymarket proposal was that there was no turning circle. I'm guessing that it's also an issue of having multiple trams running up and down the line - they need to pass each other pass each other at some point. So, you either need a circle or an extension past the terminus with a set of points so the tram can switch lines?
As for the eventual cost......
I understand for their next trick Edinburgh Cooncil will be attempting to organise an alocohol free trip to a brewery.
i'm an idiot.
Small mercies an all that.
Such a shambles and it could have been great if not for an awful lot of what ifs over the last 6/7 years.
I really hope they succeed and eventually get expanded to the original full vision (preferably with better controlled costs). I know there are alternatives that would have been prefered but it's too late for that now, so lets embrace what we (will, hopefully, eventually) have.
Fingers crossed the replacement bridge will get a re-think and made into something fit for purpose before it gets too far down the line and too late to change...
Fingers crossed the replacement bridge will get a re-think and made into something fit for purpose before it gets too far down teh line and too late to change
Are you able to explain why you consider FRC is not fit for purpose?
It won't get a rethink, contracts have been signed for Main Crossing, Junction 1A and Fife ITS.
Hopefully the new bridge will be cancelled. Its too expensive, it will cause great congestion north and south and its not needed. repair the old bridge instead.
it will cause great congestion
How'd you figure that? Why should it be any more congestion than current setup?
EDIT - agree with you on the expensive bit BTW.
Because there will be two bridges not one - but the same bottlenecks further north and south.
Its shown time and time again that this sort of project increases congestion - it does not relieve it
They are already building the new bridge.
Move house.
Its too expensive, it will cause great congestion north and south and its not needed. repair the old bridge instead.
It's not too expensive. It's capital funded with ring fenced infrastructure cash and came in considerably under budget.
It is needed because the existing bridge is coming to the end of its useable life and will be dispoportionately expensive to maintain beyond that point.
Any "additional" congestion will be relieved by J1A project.