CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Tram track issues - specific solutions

(91 posts)

  1. chdot
    Admin

    Don't forget the whole area around The Mound was laid during a period of prolonged, impressive, rainfall. (A lot of November night working too.)

    Can't see there being any desire/money for 'burying' the tram in Princes St.

    Previous plans for a double-decker road went nowhere.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    Previous discussions -

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=92

    Posted 3 months ago #
  3. chdot
    Admin

    Written SEVEN years ago -

    "

    Please remember that the current Princes St layout may change drastically in the future, once the trams are running. A council consultation is expected in early 2010. We understand that the Spokes proposal of a European-style cycleroute on one side of the trams (and with no buses/taxis) - as in the page 1 article of Spokes 104 - is one of the options likely to be in the consultation.

    "

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=92#post-316

    Posted 3 months ago #
  4. Tulyar
    Member

    Better put this in for fimm

    1978-1983 I worked for British Rail covering the area Thurso to Dalanreoch, Garve is a very rare location where a bridge was demolished to build a level crossing.

    This was one of the first rubber level crossings in the UK, and from the outset or within a year at most of opening the Diagram 951 signs appeared (I have a black & white photo many years old). The original crossing used the imported Goodyear (OMNI) panels which did not stand up very well to the loadings from 40T fish trucks traversing the S bend and popped out segments from time to time. It is not clear about the position with Diagram 951 as the level crossing - between the stop lines - is the 'owned' by Network Rail whilst still being the public road - better to check with Highland Cycling Campaign on whether there is actually a TRO in place.

    Current picture indicates this is now a STRAIL crossing and the current standard crossing could have the centre panels replaced with veloSTRAIl, as has been done at some sites in England. It might not be necessary to do the whole crossing (roughly 60 metres?) as some installations (ef Chemnitz trams) have cycle crossing zones. Perhaps an option to consider?

    Looking at https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.6143966,-4.6889421,3a,37.5y,175.19h,81.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5yy0eAtS-JaOWrCxZ0OGYw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 the threshold kerbs are showing the same problems we saw with the first attempts at Edinburgh tram track on Princes Street the tarmac has broken away and kerbs have moved very slightly or broken, creating a serious hazard of a parallel slot.

    A system is now approved which delivers a continuous cast concrete threshold which might be appropriate for reducing the maintenance burden

    https://farm1.staticflickr.com/416/18500878108_570d694b08_b.jpg (before - note sunken area - leaking pipe below?, split panels - humps over rails = rough!)

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4259/34201618064_d349e70937_c.jpg (after - levelled with broad 1-piece thresholds)

    The first veloSTRAIL in UK - Aiskew on A684 (2013) part funded by DfT cycling improvement money. was felling 1-2 cyclists per month - 42 metres 10 degrees

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.2988322,-1.5703229,3a,15y,231.98h,87.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUqS_I8R-lheqYF4hH08PEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (note that as a heritage line - 25mph speed limit - the crossing installed tramway-style with no side panels).

    Aiskew is heavily used by road cyclists on popular road circuits.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  5. i
    Member

    It would be interesting to see if the bad condition of the tram tracks gives an opportunity to replace them in a better surface layout on princes st so that bike infra can be put in place.

    Karlsruhe is digging a tram tunnel right now, so you can get an idea of costs.
    http://www.diekombiloesung.de/fileadmin/user_upload/kombiloesung/PDF/Infoflyer-eng-105x210.pdf

    Posted 3 months ago #
  6. Nelly
    Member

    <sarcasm on> I keep forgetting Edinburgh Council is really flush with cash right now......<sarcasm off>

    Posted 3 months ago #
  7. Tulyar
    Member

    Be thankful that the Edinburgh track system uses rigid rail fixings on the track slabs (but does have poured seals - which will melt in conditions like this)

    http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/croydon-tram-track-damage-in-heat/story-30398315-detail/story.html

    Edinburgh does have green track too which also mitigates this problem

    Posted 3 months ago #
  8. Tulyar
    Member

    Karlsruhe points to the only way that Edinburgh will realistically deliver a multi route tram network with a high frequency service through the central core, and avoid the hair trigger on service melt-down delivered by the many conflicting road-tram movements at the junctions between Haymarket and Waverley and the future junctions at Picardy Place plus North Bridge, Lothian Road, and other possible options.

    Note though that the Karlsruge scheme includes more than just one line in one tunnel

    Putting the tram under Princes Street brings an immediate gain for any major even that used the giant public amphitheatre formed by the Castle and Nor Loch - trams can keep running and deliver/collect the crowds from Princes Street

    Tram stops can be located in less compromised and better locations the REAL West end of Princes Street, at Castle Street AND The Mound/NPG and a stop properly connected to Waverley Station through the lower level of Waverley Market, potentially developing parts of this as an expanded Waverley Station.

    The route to Leith would eliminate the messy junction arrangements at Picardy Place by coming out in the middle or Leith Street, with the option of future branches coming out on Waterloo Place (or under it and along Calton Road) and up on to the North Bridge (in the middle)

    Funding should also be sought from all the businesses who would benefit from the all weather Princes Street collonade that would be created giving access to all the stores at basement level. Additionally this collonade will provide an all weather platform for viewing events in the Nor Loch and on the Castle Rock.- enhancing and increasing capacity for events.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  9. chdot
    Admin

    "The route to Leith would eliminate the messy junction arrangements at Picardy Place by coming out in the middle or Leith Street,"

    Mmm -

    If only there was a major redevelopment planned for that part of town.

    AND the willingness to consider PT over a massive carpark.

    #ThisIsEdinburgh

    I've always thought that a redevelopment should include a tunnel to the bus station from Picardy Place.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  10. cc
    Member

    A tram network that's underground in the city centre? Sounds a bit like the Edinburgh Metro scheme of the 1980s!
    Though that looks a little bizarre now and there was no obvious interchange point between the two metro lines. Details here

    Posted 3 months ago #
  11. nedd1e_h
    Member

    We are not going to deface Princes St Gardens by putting a tram in there and no doubt all the commercial garbage that goes with it (shop fronts, advertising).

    Even if only one side of a banking is lost in the Gardens, that is too much.

    The real problem delaying the trams is too many private cars trying to cross the city. It should be impossible to drive across the city-centre E-W or N-S and vice versa - as seen in civilised continental European cities.

    Get rid of the cars, get rid of the problem.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  12. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    Princes St is rid of private cars. The tram has priority over all cross routes. Yet there is still a massive problem with city centre public transport (too many fumy buses & taxis on Princes St, and a serious lack of safety for active travel participants).

    I think we need to look harder. Given the vast majority of Edinburgh buses and the trams are public-owned and operated (in contrast to most other UK cities), and by nominally the same operator to boot, there should be the ability and the will to do much better.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  13. nedd1e_h
    Member

    @Muran

    Sorry, but Princes St still has huge volumes of private cars travelling through critical tram junctions at each end:

    Here:
    https://goo.gl/maps/wKot1VPgF5F2

    and here:
    https://goo.gl/maps/PLfi8Dq4gaL2

    Even if the tram has priority it does not guarantee the junction will be clear and can still lead to meltdown e.g.
    https://twitter.com/ClutterMuck/status/877193494233788416

    I agree though that some of the buses should be re-routed or replaced by a tram connection.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  14. sallyhinch
    Member

    Don't really know Princes Street too well or what plans have been discussed, but one thing that struck me as I was walking to Waverley last week was that if the Princes St railings were removed, could you repurpose the pavement on that side as a cycle track, allowing pedestrians to walk on the gardens side? At the moment, the railings slice in half two pedestrian spaces, taking up a lot of space quite pointlessly

    You'd need cycle lights to allow turning movements and it wouldn't solve Shandwick Place, and the bus stops would get quite crowded though

    Posted 3 months ago #
  15. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    @Neddie_h

    The tram itself can cause its own meltdown. On at least 2 occasions, I've sat in the ASL at the Mound with a red light for at least 5 minutes because there has been a tram sat at the Princes St stop with its doors open (prob not departing because it was ahead of schedule). Its presence keeps the green lights on Princes St open, many many buses and taxis pile through, overload the next section of Princes St, block up the yellow boxes (of course). When it does become time for the tram to depart, it has nowhere to go. Stalemate all round. No crosstown traffic or private cars involved.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  16. Klaxon
    Member

    The presence of a tram alone "shouldn't" force the lights to remain open. The tram driver should press their "ready to start" button to request the signal, as if the signal changes to "proceed" too early the situation you describe can occur.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  17. nedd1e_h
    Member

    @Klaxon

    But does the driver have a way to cancel the lights opening, if they make a mistake?

    One simple mistake should not lead to meltdown... Although I guess by the time the driver realises their mistake, it is already too late. Doh!

    <Radios control>

    Posted 3 months ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    "We are not going to deface Princes St Gardens by putting a tram in there"

    Don't think anyone is suggesting that. Has been a proposal to put it under Princes St.

    My impression is that the light sequences have been changed from 'tram MUST get through' to 'tram gets priority, but not if it messes up traffic flow too much'.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  19. Klaxon
    Member

    "Does the driver have a way to cancel the lights opening, if they make a mistake?"

    Once the signal changes from - (stop) to | (proceed) it does appear to lock the sequence. It can be cancelled, I don't know by whom but probably the control room. It then changes to a small + which means "stop if safe to do so"

    Posted 3 months ago #
  20. chdot
    Admin

    "

    “The lengthy flower bank to Princes Street is world unique. Our strategy is simple: we leave this alone,” said head of architecture, David Page.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/entertainment/page-park-architects-reveals-design-for-ross-pavilion-1-4485404

    Posted 2 months ago #
  21. Stickman
    Member

    Motion put forward to the full Council meeting on Thursday. Pleasing that it's come from an SNP member

    By Councillor Macinnes - Cycle Safety
    “Recognising that officials have already started to examine issues of cycle safety, in light of the recent fatality at the junction of Lothian Road and Princes Street, Council wish to consider and implement measures to improve cycle safety and a greater sense of security for cyclists on Edinburgh’s roads.
    Council therefore agrees to:

    1) A review of the infrastructure at the junction at the west end of Princes Street where it meets Shandwick Place/Queensferry Street/Hope Street/Lothian Road/Rutland Square, to ensure the pedestrians and cyclists can use this junction safely and conveniently, and including early engagement with, and consideration of suggestions from, cyclist and pedestrian groups on this review;

    2) An acceleration of the roll-out of the proposed West-East cycleway (previously known as the Roseburn-Leith route) to ensure the entire route is complete by end of 2018;

    3) A thorough infrastructure review of the tram line, focussing on the section between Haymarket Yards and York Place, but also including points at South Gyle and Edinburgh Park where pedestrians and cyclists interact with the route, to recommend design, infrastructure, and traffic light phasing improvements to increase cyclist and pedestrian safety and convenience; this review to engage with cyclist and pedestrian groups at an early stage, and a scoping report on this work to be brought to Transport and Environment Committee within 2 cycles;

    4) Ensure the design of any tram line extension to Newhaven or elsewhere reflect the Council’s polices to prioritise pedestrian and cyclist safety and convenience and includes segregated cycle lanes on Leith Walk, with segregated routes (or direct alternatives) also considered for the further sections;

    5) Implement a medium-term action plan before the end of this Council term, to improve the public realm in the city centre with the aim of making it more pleasant, reducing motor traffic substantially, and improving conditions for, and prioritising access for, pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users, and for a scoping report on this work to be brought to Transport & Environment Committee within 2 cycles. This should include 2-way segregated cycle provision along the north side of Princes Street.”

    http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/54203/full_meeting_papers_-_part_1_-_city_of_edinburgh_council_-_29_june_2017pdf

    Posted 2 months ago #
  22. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Councilor Macinnes is one of my councilors. She lived in Geneva for years before coming back to Edinburgh, so I suspect 'gets' the whole livable city thing.

    It would be nice if she pushed for a segregated route from our ward into the city and beyond.

    Posted 2 months ago #
  23. chdot
    Admin

    "Pleasing that it's come from an SNP member"

    Suspect new Leader, Adam, had input, so progress...

    Posted 2 months ago #
  24. chdot
    Admin

    "
    5) Implement a medium-term action plan before the end of this Council term

    "

    So, another 5 years?

    (That's fast for CEC!)

    Posted 2 months ago #
  25. nedd1e_h
    Member

    Howz aboot:?

    6) Employ a lot more staff on the active travel team so we can actually see some progress on all the routes in the pipeline, instead of being completely bogged-down in consultations.

    Posted 2 months ago #
  26. Stickman
    Member

    "Suspect new Leader, Adam, had input, so progress..."

    Chas Booth helped out as well...wonder how the votes will pan out? Scott Arthur has confirmed he supports it, so are Labour on board as well?

    Posted 2 months ago #
  27. Klaxon
    Member

    This should include 2-way segregated cycle provision along the north side of Princes Street

    This would be so great. E/W as-is doesn't do anything for journeys continuing towards Lothian or Dalry roads.

    Nitpick: Wouldn't it be better on the south side? Less pedestrian mingling and no side roads to cross. Flipside is crossing side roads means better connections to said side roads. Also nitpick: We'll have a 40m uphill gap on Leith St unless that gets urgently fixed.

    Devil is in the detail. As ever.

    Posted 2 months ago #
  28. chdot
    Admin

    "so are Labour on board as well?"

    Well they are in the coalition.

    Posted 2 months ago #
  29. Stickman
    Member

    Motion passed with an amendment that tram bus companies and taxi representatives need to be consulted on any changes.

    The cynic in me says that the ease with which it passed means that it will change nothing.

    Posted 2 months ago #
  30. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    and taxi representatives

    Members of the taxi-driving community, please.

    Posted 2 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin