View Single Post
  #11   Report Post  
Old August 4th 07, 12:22 PM posted to uk.transport.london
asdf asdf is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,150
Default West London Tram

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 11:04:53 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:

The idea of WLT being "put on hold" seems to be a spin invented by the
Ealing Gazette, as the joint press release that appears on both the Mayor's
and Ealing's websites makes no mention of this. Both parties will proceed
to work on "a bus-based solution rather than the tram originally envisaged".


Not really. The GLA press release says that the cancellation is
dependent on Crossrail proceeding. Now that may well be clever
semantics but the whole thing is a mess.


I think it's just a poor (and slightly bizarre) attempt at
face-saving. Needless to say, the tram and Crossrail would have
catered for completely different types of journey, just like other bus
and bus-like services that approximately follow a rail corridor for a
portion of their route length, and the necessity of the tram is not
affected by whether or not Crossrail goes ahead. £30 million has been
spent on the tram scheme in full knowledge of the plans for Crossrail.

Quite why Ealing Council believe a bus based system employing many of
the same traffic priorities as the tram would have used will be any more
popular I do not know. The main point of opposition to the tram, if I
have been paying attention, was the effect that its tracks and
priorities would have on people being able to use their cars. I can't
see buses being more readily acceptable to those same opponents. I
suspect Ealing Council hope they can scrap the majority of the proposed
priorities and just leave the bus service (enhanced or otherwise) to be
a disaster area.


Agreed. I fully expect to see this happen.

Current services are supposedly at capacity and
allegedly so are the roads so what is going to give to make all this
work? Apologies for the cynicism but I would have preferred the tram
scheme to proceed as that was the only option that would have both
forced a reduction of road space and provided a suitable attractive
alternative to car drivers.


I agree with everything you've said here. I think it's sad that the
private car stalwarts have managed to kill off a scheme that would
have left them relatively little worse off (whilst reducing car
capacity in places, it would have compensated by removing cars from
the road), while denying everyone else the option of a fast tram
journey, effectively dragging everyone down with them into congestion
hell.