CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

Are South Sub tram-trains any closer?

(100 posts)

No tags yet.


1…34

  1. chdot
    Admin

    “

    The Scottish Transport Users’ Consultative Committee – whose members from all over Scotland were appointed by the Minister of Transport – held a hearing on March 23, 1962, on the South Sub closure. And when it voted, there was a tie – eight votes for, eight against. The chairman, former Edinburgh Lord Provost John G Banks, gave his casting vote in favour of closure.

    Mr Drysdale says Banks reflected a view common among politicians and others at the time. “These were the men who in the early 60s were dreaming of urban motorways, flyovers and underpasses. There was growing car ownership, people wanted the freedom of the car. Politicians didn't want to stand in their way.”

    …

    In fact, 50 per cent of journeys on the South Sub in 1961 were suburb to suburb, such as Morningside to Portobello or Craigmillar to Gorgie, rather than suburb to city centre.

    …

    Mr Drysdale believes the South Sub still has the potential to play an important part in an efficient city transport system, especially linking areas which are not linked by bus services. Well-known capacity problems between Haymarket and Waverley could be overcome by exploring the option of a “tram train”, already used in Sheffield, he says.

    “

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heritage-and-retro/heritage/edinburghs-south-sub-railway-heres-why-forgotten-railway-closed-60-years-ago-today-3835213

    Posted 1 year ago #

  2. jonty
    Member

    Interesting to note that no Lothian bus really traces the line of the South Sub. Appreciate it clearly wouldn't be as fast or be able to exactly follow the route but it would at least provide some inter-suburb travel and indicate likely demand. Lots of scope for a filtered route through the Grange, for example.

    Posted 1 year ago #

  3. chdot
    Admin

    “it would at least provide some inter-suburb travel and indicate likely demand.”

    Previously one argument was that ‘well the 38 sort of goes that way and doesn’t have many passengers’.

    Posted 1 year ago #

  4. jonty
    Member

    And that is certainly a concern. Seems like the rigorous approach would be to invest tens/hundreds of thousands in a high quality 'shadow' bus services as a 2 year experiment, SfP style, which actually help people, than a continual trickle of feasibility studies which provide no immediate value or risking hundreds of millions on actually doing it.

    Given the challenges around building the new stations, re-routing/running alongside freight, bespoke vehicles, increasing capacity around Waverley/tying in the tram and rail network near Haymarket, I genuinely wonder whether - if the demand is there - building a roughly parallel tram line would be the cheaper and better option.

    In some ways, that's what a tram line going north from the Bridges would (partly) do. It would probably soak up most of the suburb-city centre demand and a fair chunk of the suburb-suburb demand that the Sub would likely meet. I understand such a line if fully built would essentially parallel the Sub from South Newington to Fort Kinnaird, on a probably more useful alignment. That's certainly where I'd spend the money!

    Posted 1 year ago #

  5. Arellcat
    Moderator

    I agree that 'we' are still assuming everyone goes into the city centre rather than around it, and that Waverley and Haymarket are the only destinations that matter to a re-opened South Sub. But trams-on-Sub that then reuse the Slateford-WAR alignment into town are still akin to bus thinking, and I doubt Princes St could take more trams without doing something about reducing the number of coincident Princes St bus routes.

    I tend to think that the elephant in the room isn't the South Sub at all, but the complete lack of an alternative for freight to get from the ECML to the WCML for which the Sub is the only choice. I think Network Rail should rebuild the route from Berwick to Tweedbank via Coldstream, and rebuild the route from Tweedbank to Symington via Innerleithen, Peebles and Biggar. That could build capacity and opportunity for all kinds of passenger movements. Rebuild the connection from Alnwick to Coldstream with a new wye junction for further resilience.

    Posted 1 year ago #

  6. jonty
    Member

    Now that's thinking big!

    Perhaps at the same time they can grapple with the issue that the WCML has to share tracks with perhaps Edinburgh's most convenient and well-used suburban line.

    Posted 1 year ago #

  7. chdot
    Admin

    “I doubt Princes St could take more trams without doing something about reducing the number of coincident Princes St bus routes.”

    Yes

    That highlights one of the many mysteries of how Ed ‘runs’ its transport options.

    One of the assumptions/plans for the tram was that there would be no/few buses on Princes St.

    The idea was to have bus/tram exchanges.

    Can’t remember the details (or if they were worked out). Think/presume the idea was for one at the bottom of Lothian Road and the other - ? - at the bottom of The Bridges, when the idea was to go down Leith Street.

    Whatever the plan and reasons for not doing it - ‘people will never change bus/tram/bus ‘ - there must be a better way of dealing with buses/passengers/Princes St.

    People keep putting pictures on Twitter alleging that ‘most of the buses are empty’ and ‘it’s quicker to walk’.

    Posted 1 year ago #

  8. jonty
    Member

    That was an argument for Picardy Place being the way it is too - buses must be able to turn around.

    Posted 1 year ago #

  9. chdot
    Admin

    “

    The council also plans to look again at the South Suburban rail line. Cllr Arthur said: “It is still quite speculative, but we have been speaking to Network Rail – there has been more than one meeting and I think they’re open to a discussion about it.” He said it would not be possible to reopen the whole circular route because the section between Waverley and Haymarket was too congested. “But there is a chance part of the line could open, so Portobello perhaps to Slateford or something like that.”

    “

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/edinburgh-transport-blueprint-public-transport-plans-will-make-edinburgh-one-of-leading-cities-in-europe-4005748

    Posted 1 year ago #

  10. Tulyar
    Member

    As should have happened from outset trams should run UNDER carriageway from Haymarket Terrace to Leith Street - route proposed and planned by Caledonian Railway to extend from terminus on Lothian Road to North British Hotel

    Ground conditions - alluvial & clay over fractured shale all the way. Sink piles along the carriageway (centre/edges) remove section of carriageway & lay beams on piles, then replace carriageway in stages

    Dig out space under beams for trams and all weather pedestrian space with access to gardens and shops on Princes Street

    Trains from Slateford could also go back on old rail track bed & drop underground where this runs close to & parallel with existing rail tunnels from Haymarket. There is space for an option to fit in 1-2 tracks along foot of Castle Rock and bring trains in to the Sub - South of the Klondyke Wall, with space to add 1-2 platforms under Fruit Market The Mound is basically waste material tipped from High Street over 2 centuries ago reckon its settled by now

    Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

1…34

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin