Edinburgh's trams were originally supposed to be trundling through city streets this year, 2010. After a series of delays, this week we learned that the main contractors Bilfinger Berger may need until 2014 to complete the tram works.
Last year, independent experts assessed the project was deliverable by 2012. As contractors and TIE fight it out behind closed doors, we publish this recent open letter by Allan Alstead to the Edinburgh City Council leader Jenny Dawe seeking more transparency and openness about costs and completion dates for Edinburgh's trams project.
Dear Ms Dawe,
In your article published in ”Outlook” for winter 2009, you stated that you wanted to hear the views of the citizens of Edinburgh. I am happy to accept this invitation. The same article stated that your information indicated that 50% of the people of Edinburgh did not want the trams, while the other 50% were in favour of the trams provided the project was completed on time and within budget. As it is already over budget and late one must presume that there must now be a very significant majority against the tram project. I challenge the Council to take a proper poll once the citizens of Edinburgh have been given the true and accurate facts about overspend and delay.
While everyone must commend the Council on opening Princes Street on time for the festive season – to the relief of the entire population of the city – this was achieved by having virtually twenty four hour working for seven days of the week for a very long period. Obviously this was necessary as the project was behind time, but what is not clear is the effect that this will have had on the budget for the project. But all Edinburgh residents should be increasingly concerned about the profligate expenditure on the trams project. With estimates from some authoritative sources being quoted as saying that the cost of the project is now running at over £750 million, where is the additional money coming from to complete the work? Everyone has been told that there is only a finite amount of money available. Surely it is high time for the Council to provide some updated and guaranteed budget figures for the project? It is simply not good enough to withhold this key information and hide behind the excuse of the dispute with Bilfinger Berger.
The original drive to set up a new “trams project” was based on the justification that the envisaged major residential developments in Newhaven and Leith would require a much increased public transport link capacity to Edinburgh Airport. The recent credit crunch together with the very unwelcome downgrading of Edinburgh as a European, or even British finance centre, has meant that Forth Ports have shelved
their development plans and work has ceased on the majority of projects. This leaves the city implementing a hugely expensive transport plan for which the key economic justification has disappeared. The projected passenger figures must now seem somewhat fanciful and the assessed income to be generated, as given in the Council’s own figures, must in reality be based on very considerable increases in the fares to be charged on all forms of public transport. In this situation the repercussions are currently unclear and perhaps one of the economy measures under review may be the continued availability of the free travel card for pensioners. It would be reassuring to many if you were to guarantee that the free travel pass for pensioners will be maintained for all forms of transport.
The beleaguered Edinburgh citizens have now had to suffer the recommencement of tram works which started again on 4th January 2010 - a sort of belated Christmas present from the Council. With this in mind it is critical to reconsider carefully at this time the effects the trams will have on residential areas in the city. Citizens of Edinburgh seem to be in an extraordinary position, where it appears that the rules have been changed so that Residents Associations are not permitted to comment during the Statutory Consultation period. Furthermore formal Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) have been introduced seemingly to minimise or delay the consideration of objections regarding the introduction of the trams. Residents of Edinburgh have many constructive and, we feel, helpful comments to offer through our Residential Associations. The imposed delay in considering objections means that any meaningful response, requiring back up data or information, will be virtually rendered totally ineffective by this ruling. This hardly seems to be an open, transparent and democratic process.
The residents of New Town have themselves taken scientific readings of noise pollution in the area and we have evidence that the traffic pollution levels already exceed the limits stipulated by the European Union. It is regrettable that the Council do not monitor pollution in the city with appropriately sited monitoring stations – for instance the Grassmarket has been included in the “Central Air Quality Management Area”, but traffic volumes there are much lighter than in some residential areas of the New Town. The Council also only reports on nitrogen dioxide, while no measurement appears to have been taken of the very much more dangerous PM10 particulates. In addition carbon monoxide levels exceed current statutory limits. This evidence strongly supports the proposal that Shandwick Place should not be closed for use by other vehicles.
One of the New Town residents sent the First Minister a very rational and well argued letter which included noise mapping data. This clearly showed that Princes Street will become one of the quietest streets by night whilst forcing traffic noise on to roads through existing residential areas. It is ironic that if the New Town had been a recent residential development, then the levels of increase in noise and pollution would not have been permitted by law! Unfortunately the First Minister declined to follow up the points raised in the letter. He dismissed the matter as being one for the City of Edinburgh Council. Mr Salmond is probably rubbing his hands awaiting the failure of the trams plan when he could happily say “I told you so; we wanted to stop the project.”
Much has been made by the City Council that the tram project is a “state of the art” system. Why then has the same system been rejected by both Rome and Bordeaux as being out of date? Why has no opportunity been taken to preserve the world famous attractive vista of Princes Street by routing power sources underground as the French have done in Bordeaux? A “state of the art” transport system requires to be integrated, but this aspect does not seem to have been thought through. For a start, with only one stop for the trams in Princes Street (west of Hanover Street) all those arriving by train at Waverley will have a very long walk with their luggage to catch a tram, however, they could struggle uphill to St Andrew Square. For those coming down Lothian Road and going to the airport there is an interesting walk along Shandwick Place to the tram stop at Atholl Crescent. I hope all our visitors are going to be warned to bring the minimum of luggage! Anyone who is elderly or disabled will have to take a taxi. Residents of Newhaven would themselves be quicker to take a taxi to the airport rather than endure a forty five minute clanking journey through the city. A properly “integrated system” should employ the technology which is currently available to identify the passenger's destination and then produce a through ticket. It does not appear that Edinburgh will have this technology available. The poor man's option would be to introduce a zoning system for public transport, similar to that used by London Underground.
Finally we have been told that the first of the Edinburgh trams has been produced. Many will not have realised that although the capacity will be two hundred and fifty passengers, only seventy eight will have seats – less than one third of the capacity! However, in line with your “Outlook” article I would welcome your response to the matters raised in this letter. Unless you have some really good answers which will satisfy the citizens of Edinburgh, I suspect a large majority will still prefer the existing excellent bus service!
Yours sincerely,
Allan Alstead
Director of Alstead Consulting Ltd (owner of EdinburghGuide.com)