CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 17years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
“so might be wrong“
Unlikely - at least by a factor that would make much difference
So, main issue seems to be ‘old thing, don’t mess with it’
Might be a good idea to ban current traffic ‘just in case’
Then add some lightweight track and batteries to remove need for overhead structures
Would there be any issues with there being rooms and vaults and things (or nothing, where it crosses the Cowgate) underneath the bridge? Is there enough depth for enough concrete beneath the rails, and enough space for any pipes and stuff at the side, if they have to be moved (if not moved twice, as on Leith Walk)?
Apart from the underground car park at Tollcross and the railway tunnels around the WAR junction, is there anything much beneath Lothian Road/Earl Grey St which would object to being trammed over?
This was a note relating to the Herald piece, & covers a galamaufry of issues so I'll drop my notes here first & then add further comments, based on a career that saw me rebuilding a railway station age 16 as a volunteer, whilst my future boss (John Grimshaw) was building a new railway line, including the ONLY railway spiral in the UK to gain height, with boys from Westminster School, blowing up rock to create the railway route ... in 1968
With some great help from @arellcat dipping in to the RGS records & more we've also tracked the folly of the delivery of the first attempt at the tram tracks from Haymarket to York Place, which had to be rebuilt before it opened, with the delivery of the new electric railway between Edinburgh & Glasgow getting 16 miles of new track completed faster than the 7 miles of tram track to the airport!
"I've worked on delivery of cycle routes, & building new rail lines in a varied carer that started in 1964
During 1990's I was also working with the Panel for Historical Engineering Works who did a detailed study of Dean Bridge with further work connected to the unbuilt 1890's project to build 2 rail lines under Princes Street. Using the system proven in 1963 to build Oxford Circus Station whilst traffic continued to flow over the top on Oxford Street & Regent Street
Dean Bridge already carries trucks & buses with 9-10 Ton axle loads (trams have 8-9 Ton axle loads which are spread evenly through the rails (unlike tyre loads which are point loads on the flexible tarmac pavement. Below the road surface on Dean Bridge are evenly spaced masonry ribs that fit over the stone arch rings, and the tram track rails should be placed to transfer the loads properly to Telford's well designed structure in an elegant light solution much as his Tay Bridge in Perth uses holes through the arch spandrels
The trams should use a single laced track across the bridge alternately, which is easily delivered with a regulated & guided system
On the South end, where the rock bed rises from the Water of Leith Gorge the tram route should dive under Queensferry Street to connect with the tunnel under Princes Street & Shandwick Place with extra track(s) to enable tram services to be regulated or turned back to suit the timetables
This underground chamber can have a planned spur going South along the middle of Lothian Road, the traditional place for trams for over a century
DM for developing this as a wider piece with outline plans & profiles
Looking at the broken up concrete of the track slabs running from Haymarket to Waverley Bridge you can record the failed load transfer joints & patched up repairs, with lumps of the upper slab sunken or sticking up to bring down a cyclist, or the street ironwork (valve covers etc) sinking & falling away from the tarmac flexible pavement everywhere
I walked the route with Broughton Spurtle a few years ago and recorded the state of the track
Essentially to build the Tram track some 200 years of compaction of the supporting ground was destroyed as the sub grade was excavated to expose the weak & wet soils (glacial till lying over fractured (& saturated) shale for much of this distance
Manchester's tram route extensions had clear ground stability testing & allowances for remediation built in to the project with bearing strength & vane tests (soil cohesion) before the concrete was laid
Obviously much more to debate & discuss for a stage-gate plan for future tram projects
Remember also that running trams on heavy rail track can trip up over the steel tyre profiles of trams being very different to those on trains, and modified track (points & crossings) is required if they are sharing the same rails
Happy to discuss but be aware that I'm seriously resource poor & need some IT & admin support to keep up with PM's etc
Useful (and surprisingly Edinburgh-centric) article in RailEngineer:
https://www.railengineer.co.uk/building-tomorrows-tramway-today/
Beyond transportFor James Hammett, managing director of UKTram, the current political and industry environment presents a significant opportunity.
“There’s never been a better time to be talking about light rail,” he explained. “Government and regional leaders increasingly recognise that tramways aren’t simply transport systems. They’re tools for placemaking, economic growth, regeneration, and decarbonisation.”
That shift in thinking is important.
Historically, transport schemes have often been assessed primarily on passenger numbers or journey time savings. Increasingly, however, authorities are taking a broader view, considering how fixed transport infrastructure can stimulate investment, improve connectivity, and transform entire urban areas.
A tram network, Hammett argues, should be viewed as part of a city’s long-term development strategy rather than as a standalone transport intervention.
Affordability
A recurring challenge facing light rail remains cost.
Questions around affordability continue to dominate transport discussions, with comparisons frequently made between UK schemes and those delivered elsewhere in Europe. However, Hammett believes those comparisons can sometimes be misleading.
“What often gets included in tramway costs isn’t necessarily the tramway itself,” he explained.
Major schemes frequently include extensive public realm improvements, utility diversions, streetscape enhancements, and wider regeneration work. These elements are often accounted for within the overall project budget, making direct comparisons difficult.
In some cases, the infrastructure supporting urban regeneration can represent a substantial proportion of total project expenditure. This reinforces the need to evaluate schemes holistically, considering the regeneration and economic benefits they deliver rather than focusing solely on the transport infrastructure.
Doesn't change the fact that because ThisIsEdinburgh and not ThisIsFrenchTown, costs will be hugely higher for no good reason.
“surprisingly Edinburgh-centric“
…
“Doesn't change the fact that because ThisIsEdinburgh and not ThisIsFrenchTown, costs will be hugely higher for no good reason.”
This may explain part of the problem in Ed - “understanding customer needs rather than selecting technology”…
Though in Ed, not just the tech also the vanity of plush/heavy trams/track!
“
The passenger
For Rob Thomas, head of sales at Siemens Mobility Rail Infrastructure UK, futureproofing begins with understanding customer needs rather than selecting technology.
“The technology isn’t the starting point,” he explained. “The starting point is the passenger experience and understanding what outcomes customers actually want.”
While safety, reliability, and operational performance remain fundamental requirements, technology should be viewed as an enabler rather than an objective in itself.
Journey planning applications, integrated ticketing systems, passenger information platforms, and future digital services can all sit on top of a robust operational core.
The key, Thomas argues, is avoiding the temptation to specify known solutions too early.
“We should be focusing on the outcomes we want to achieve rather than simply repeating what was done on previous projects.”
“
https://www.railengineer.co.uk/building-tomorrows-tramway-today/
(Same article as previous post)
Vote seems to have gone well considering... (Spokes keeping a live Bluesky thread going)
Conservatives oppose entirelyCllr Jenkinson accepts Green amendt & part of SNP
Vote
7 Lab/Green/SNP
2 LibDem
2 ConSo..
a. Support for entire route, priority South
b. No more work till Autumn '27 after SEStransit report
c. Strong Green amendt on (bike emoji) safety included
I was in that Bergen in Norway in the summer, where they have a light rail system connecting to the airport (which is even further from its city centre than Edinburgh airport). Apparently it was funded by road tolls (causing much upset from those north of Bergen, who had to pay the tolls to drive into the city, but didn't get a light rail connection as a result). Also, the council then zoned areas close to the stations to favour development, driving economic growth into those areas. All quite admirable (but then my main impression of Norway was that it was extremely civilised)
Oh and final fun fact from the article - the Norwegian power company had to pay to move power cables out of the way of the railway, and wasn't allowed to charge the costs to the rail project. (See, ThatIsNorway)
Also relating to the RailEngineer thing...
"The challenge is no longer simply getting passengers onto a tram. It is ensuring they can easily reach the stop in the first place and complete their journey at the other end."
Were there to ever be tram-trains on the south sub, whose street-to-platform paradigm would win out? Would platforms be as quick to access as most of the tram stops (not counting the airport, or Hermiston Gait) where they're quick to get to as they're on the streets where people are allowed to be, or would they all have to have that extra barrier/bottleneck/ramp/gate move from public space to Network Rail DON'T LOOK THE TRACKS IN THE EYE space?
There was no cash to build any of this yesterday, there is no more cash today, there will be no more cash tomorrow.
The Scottish public finances are in a parlous state, transport capital expenditure is being eaten by the A9 dualling project, which won't finish until 2035 (or later). Most of Scotland's major trunk road structures are reaching the end of their design life of 60 years and need major upgrades or replacement - the Woodside viaducts are only the first of many. What do you reckon - will the Scottish Government choose to let the strategic road network fall into delapidation?
This whole situation seems bizarre to me - people fervently arguing over the respective merits of what are effectivelty fantasy transport projects. Every effort should be being invested in delivering low-cost interventions to support walking, cycling, and buses - things that can be delivered quickly with a bit of political will.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to see the tram network extended - but Council funded multi-billion pound urban transport projects are simply not where we are at the moment.
Or is it just me - have I finally lost the plot? Is there something I am not seeing?
“have I finally lost the plot?”
Unlikely as your rational/sensible/reliable contributions to CCE have always been valuable/valued
On the other hand too much observation/involvement can lead to insanity…
“Is there something I am not seeing?”
Inevitably, but that doesn’t mean there is something there to be seen!
Politics has often been regarded as ‘the art of the possible but increasingly it might be just the preserve of artless low skilled wishful thinkers encouraged or restrained by officials
Cynical moi?
Additionally in the ‘modern world’ any ‘certainties’ or even ‘possibilities’ are harder to find/rely on
Ooh
“
‘You have to be mindful of the political make-up of this council and what the art of the possible is’ - Cllr Stephen Jenkinson
“
See two posts above
It’s possible interpretations/implications are different…
(And that’s without considering ‘where’s the money coming from’)
To me ‘bigger picture’ is always about bad decisions for the wrong reasons
And ways of changing or working around some of it
Most of Scotland's major trunk road structures are reaching the end of their design life of 60 years and need major upgrades or replacement - the Woodside viaducts are only the first of many. What do you reckon - will the Scottish Government choose to let the strategic road network fall into delapidation?
Time to demolish the lot of it and return to simpler and happier times. Car-dependency is 20thC folly. Think of all the nice 21stC "public luxury" things we could have with the money instead.
You have to be mindful of the political make-up of this council and what the art of the possible is’ - Cllr Stephen Jenkinson
Translation: We can't communicate and agree with other parties to make things happen
“
The £1.4bn question: The next challenge is securing the funding needed to press ahead with work. The whole line would cost up to £2.9bn with the priority southern stretch alone priced at £1.4bn. That is most likely to come from brokering an agreement for the tram to be one of the Edinburgh City-Region’s key regional transport priorities.
No Meadows line: Conservation body Edinburgh World Heritage’s concerns about the impact of trams on North Bridge has reopened debate about the possibility of instead taking the line across the Meadows. However, the council has investigated that option and ruled it out, partly due to the greater traffic congestion it would cause.
“
https://www.edinburghinquirer.co.uk/p/the-rise-of-the-spartans?
partly due to the greater traffic congestion it would cause
Only because the council are drawing vast numbers of cars into, and through, the city via Lothian Rd.
A bus-gate on Melville Dr would certainly be a benefit
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts