Borders Rail

First.Aspect

Okay, this is a Scotland only question, so I'm expecting about 3 answers....

... why is there such opposition to building a new rail line cutting through one of the most congested parts of Scotland and extending out to one of the prettiest, Abbey strewn and unknown parts of the UK? Why is Labour actually recommending that more ROADS be built? Its not exactly the tram is it (which Labour approved)?

Comments?

chadders81

Rail is very expensive and unless you have a certain level of demand, it's difficult to predict the returns. Roads rarely look bad value for money as long as people can see cars on them.

Until the government changes the way it offers franchises to operators (and they're starting slowly to do that) and give them an incentive to invest their own money in infrastructure, you've got a bit of a stalemate where the government is reluctant to spend and the operator can't. That's why all this country's stations are such a disgrace.

daviesee

Simple answer - SNP or A.N. Other propose it, Labour reject it. That is their default position.

FWIW - The SNP are the only party to object to the trams but were a minority leadership and got out voted.

If I understand correctly, all they are trying to do is renew a line that was in existence so the majority of the infrastructure should be there, if in a bad state of repair. My position would be that if the rail line does not go ahead, then it should be made into a cycle way. A path from the centre of Edinburgh to Glentress, 25 miles, wouldn't be a bad idea either.

meanredspider

I wasn't really aware of this track until yesterday. It would be nice to have a track to the North that is at least as quick as a car. The fact that he A9 is really crap but the train is slower is quite remarkable.

spen666

where is this line proposed to go?

Bordersroadie

I live in Melrose, just two miles from the station of Tweedbank, the farthest extent of the new railway linking the Borders to Edinburgh. Work has already started in Galashiels, 4 miles away.

Most of the arguments against it are covered in this document stating 20 reasons why the new link should go ahead: http://www.campaignforbordersrail.org/C ... 7feb11.pdf

The debate to reinstate it has run since the original route was closed in the 60s. As with all of these projects there will be benefits and drawbacks, but nimby-isms and complaints about inappropriate public spending get the most media coverage.

It certainly is one of the most sparsely populated places in the UK, one of the most beautiful and in many ways untouched for decades.

I love the Scottish Borders partly because of this and its isolation (and the miles and miles of untrafficked backroads making for some of the best road cycling territory anywhere!) so if I were to be a nimby myself I'd say I'd be happy for things to stay as they are but I accept that change is sometimes necessary, despite the fact that I don't fully understand enough about how it will actually improve/impair life for the area.

The Borders was once a prosperous area largely based on a healthy textiles industry but since its decline due to (the usual story) Far Eastern imports killing home-spun fabrics, it is, economically, a shadow of its former self. With this backdrop, whatever the drawbacks of the rail link, my overall feeling is that it can only be a positive thing for the area. Certainly the road links here are very "retro", with no dual carriageway between here and the west (Dumfries/Cumbria), the south (Northumberland/Newcastle), the east (Berwick/Northumberland coast) and the north (Edinburgh and routes to Glasgow), apart from occasional overtaking sections.

The shame is that the journey time to Edinburgh from here will be no quicker than by car, but if the ticket prices are reasonable it has a chance of success.

First.Aspect

It might be the same journey time on Sundays, but to get through the south east part of Edinburgh takes rather longer during the rest of the week. You can be in the Dalkeith area in an hour and an hour or more later in town looking for parking. Given the amount of developments in that part of the lothians I struggle to imagine how the roads could be improved to make them comparable.

For example, gorebridge to Edinburgh city centre takes about 90 mins by bus. It's only 12 miles. A train is estimated to take 17 minutes.

As to cost - it's about £10 million per mile. The tram is about £80 million per mile. The m74 cost £140 million per mile.

The rail link seems pretty good value to me.

The Borders are sparsely populated and that won't change. But it it the biggest population in the UK without a rail line.

wgwarburton

Hi,
I think a fair bit of the controversy arises as a result of the perception that rail services are of most benefit to the affluent middle classes, especially commuters.

Given the substantial amounts of public money involved in building a new line and then the subsidy that's put into running it, it's reasonable to question whether it's best use of taxpayers money.

The SNP has redirected public funds to upgrading the A9... Arguably this is "old thinking", encouraging car use with it's associated risks and carbon footprint. On the other hand the road is a critical link in Scotland's infrastructure and clearly inadequate for its current usage. You can argue about driver behavior, inappropriate speed and so on but the alternatives very limited, at best, and the "accident" statistics make grim reading...

Scotland's shopping list of worthy infrastructure projects is long... Deciding which ones get priority is far from easy, and actually identifying and committing funding to those which have been selected an ongoing challenge...

Road upgrades, new bridges, new rail lines, upgrades/electrification of existing ones, airport links... Cycling infrastructure...

...and that's just Transport Infrastructure.... What about utilities? Water supply, flood defence, electricity transmission (renewable generation isn't much use without transmission capacity), broadband provision, gas supply....

I like trains. I think the line should go ahead (along with the EGIP project to electrify the Edinburgh/Glasgow/Dunblane triangle) but I have to admit that's an emotional, not a completely rational conclusion. EGIP has already been scaled back and I hope the Borders line doesn't go the same way but if I had to make an either/or decision between those and, for arguments sake, the A9 upgrade I'd have to do a lot of research and probably a lot of thinking before I'd be happy to commit myself!!!

Cheers,
W.

meanredspider

The thing about the A9 in particular is the volume of seasonal traffic. A disproportionate number of accidents involve those from outside the area and, in particular, foreign families. With the best will in the world, these people aren't going to take the train.

And, whilst you can work on driver behaviour, it's the people who will believe they are driving entirely legally that contribute to the issues: trucks with 20 cars in tow, all nose-to-tail, doing their legally required 40mph. I live a mile or so from the A9 - it's 120 miles to Perth and the first glimpse of motorway. Drivers rarely experience roads like the A9 in the rest of the UK. Few seem capable of overtaking and those with the will to are often totally inept (some make me want to weep). Unless we're prepared to train a nation of motorists in a seemingly lost skill, or ban trucks (and camper vans and caravans), we have little hope. And, almost designed to create an issue where none exists, nearly all work on the A9 is done via alternate line working which creates queues of traffic. Mix in some Highland weather, long drawn-out, dawns and dusks, and a few big deer for good measure and it's a miracle more people aren't killed.

andyrr

This line will pass within a mile or less of my front door - I personally (I havent looked at all of the arguments yet) find it a little hard to believe that a regular rail service between the borders and Edinburgh will be heavily used and worth the massive cost. I wonder if it will become a 2nd Edinburgh Tram Project - soaring costs and people wondering if it is of much use given that ? Who decided it was a brilliant idea worthy of sinking many millions of £ into it ?

Bus from me to Edin centre takes us 45/50 minutes, not 90, we stay jusst south of Gorebridge -that's the First Bus which is a limited stop a number of my neighbours use it and it seems a good option for them. Will the train be better than that ? How : faster, cheaper ?
I used to commute Musselburgh - Galashiels and as I recall it was around an hour or so journey time on a good day and that's door - door. The roads aren't busy until you hit the outskirts of Edinburgh so as long as that isn't too busy I, and lots of others that would drive the journey (or cycle as I currently do as I have no public transport option to the West of Edin), and would have the advantage of not needing to get to/from the train station at either end which adds on a good few minutes at least.
If you were fortunate enough to live very close to a station then the rail option might seem attractive but otherwise I query it's value for a lot of people.

wgwarburton

daviesee wrote:

Simple answer - SNP or A.N. Other propose it, Labour reject it. That is their default position.

FWIW - The SNP are the only party to object to the trams but were a minority leadership and got out voted.

Yeah, but the trams will be great when they are running! I daresay SNP objection to the project won't be seen as a black mark against them in 2014(!)... There will be plenty of other issues to discuss and if they can't spin their objection to make it appear that their problem with it was the project and it's implementation rather then the service itself then they arn't the party we've come to know...

If I understand correctly, all they are trying to do is renew a line that was in existence so the majority of the infrastructure should be there, if in a bad state of repair. My position would be that if the rail line does not go ahead, then it should be made into a cycle way. A path from the centre of Edinburgh to Glentress, 25 miles, wouldn't be a bad idea either.

Much of the old route is already cycle-way, presumably it'll be lost when the tracks are relaid. I don't think there's much infrastructure left, TBH- As I understand it the bridges will need a lot of work. Track, signalling etc will need to be built from scratch and stations rebuilt. Be nice if I was wrong about this...Anyone know?

Cheers,
W.

t4tomo

daviesee wrote:

. A path from the centre of Edinburgh to Glentress, 25 miles, wouldn't be a bad idea either.

But the MTB's won't ride to glentress, that would be too much like hard work. Surely they'll still drive there with the bike on the back of the car, before going down hill and then moan why there aren't lifts installed to get them back to the top?

andyrr

The sections of line that I know of are totally overgrown - I walked my dog along a section near Gorebrige a few weeks back - some bits are fairly obviously old railway line, other bits are not that distinguishable from the rest of the surrounding fields. Not sure how many bridges there are - I I was at is blocked up currently.
A portion of the work is just (!) to dig out the cutting again so the route of the line I'd guess in the main is not changing. I understand that compulsory house purchase orders have been made so it's now a case of getting in there and doing the work. I am sure that is probably just a bit simplistic but the line's route and it's surroundings haven't changed vastly in the interim although maybe some new houses and road alterations etc will have some impact.

andyrr

t4tomo wrote:

daviesee wrote:

. A path from the centre of Edinburgh to Glentress, 25 miles, wouldn't be a bad idea either.

But the MTB's won't ride to glentress, that would be too much like hard work. Surely they'll still drive there with the bike on the back of the car, before going down hill and then moan why there aren't lifts installed to get them back to the top?

The Innerleithen d/h course is now getting a lift - the Uplift project just got the go-ahead.
Agree that the Glentress x/c course is too far away from the Edinburgh etc for people to ride to - plus it attracts riders from a lot further afield that Edinburgh.

First.Aspect

andyrr wrote:

This line will pass within a mile or less of my front door - I personally (I havent looked at all of the arguments yet) find it a little hard to believe that a regular rail service between the borders and Edinburgh will be heavily used and worth the massive cost. I wonder if it will become a 2nd Edinburgh Tram Project - soaring costs and people wondering if it is of much use given that ? Who decided it was a brilliant idea worthy of sinking many millions of £ into it ?

Bus from me to Edin centre takes us 45/50 minutes, not 90, we stay jusst south of Gorebridge -that's the First Bus which is a limited stop a number of my neighbours use it and it seems a good option for them. Will the train be better than that ? How : faster, cheaper ?
I used to commute Musselburgh - Galashiels and as I recall it was around an hour or so journey time on a good day and that's door - door. The roads aren't busy until you hit the outskirts of Edinburgh so as long as that isn't too busy I, and lots of others that would drive the journey (or cycle as I currently do as I have no public transport option to the West of Edin), and would have the advantage of not needing to get to/from the train station at either end which adds on a good few minutes at least.
If you were fortunate enough to live very close to a station then the rail option might seem attractive but otherwise I query it's value for a lot of people.

The long term strategic plan for Edinburgh has been to build heavily along this corridor. That's the main use, but I take your point that beyond gorebridge it probably won't be heavily used. Further in it will be.

I rechecked the timetables, there are two busses each way per day which take 50 mins and the rest take 70. If they are not held up in traffic. The first bus service, for as long as it lasts, takes the same amount of time 50 mins, but takes you to the bus station, not as central as Waverley or haymarket.

Still three times longer than the train though. And not exactly bicycle friendly.

daviesee

WGWarburton wrote:

Yeah, but the trams will be great when they are running!

Trolling, surely :?:
A tram system costing £776 million to replace an existing bus service with existing bus lanes?
That was supposed to go from the airport to Leith docks but now will go from a shopping centre to Princes Street for double the original estimate cost.
I, along with allegedly the majority of intended users think it is a complete waste of time and money.

First.Aspect

daviesee wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

Yeah, but the trams will be great when they are running!

Trolling, surely :?:
A tram system costing £776 million to replace an existing bus service with existing bus lanes?
That was supposed to go from the airport to Leith docks but now will go from a shopping centre to Princes Street for double the original estimate cost.
I, along with allegedly the majority of intended users think it is a complete waste of time and money.

The tram is so catastrophically useless and expensive it does a disservice to all civilnengineering projects other than wembley and the Scottish parliament to mention it in the same breath.

wgwarburton

daviesee wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

Yeah, but the trams will be great when they are running!

Trolling, surely :?:

No, not really. I'm looking forward to having trams back in Edinburgh and I think they'll improve the city.

A tram system costing £776 million to replace an existing bus service with existing bus lanes?
That was supposed to go from the airport to Leith docks but now will go from a shopping centre to Princes Street for double the original estimate cost.
I, along with allegedly the majority of intended users think it is a complete waste of time and money.

I'm not going to argue about the costs, the original project was clearly deeply flawed. It's to be hoped that once the system's up and running and providing quick, convenient access and interchange between road, heavy-rail and airport along the ludicrously heavily trafficked western corridor the benefits will be clear.
Given that the route includes the airport, park+ride, Gogarburn, Edinburgh Park, Haymarket, Princes Street and St Andrews Square I find it hard to see how it won't be in demand! That's just the business use, of course, add potential shopping trips, a little leisure use (Zoo is quite close, Murrayfield, Golf courses etc) and the opportunity to get to the airport from outside Edinburgh without having to go to Haymarket and catch a bus and it's clear that it won't be a wasted resource... even if it isn't good value-for-money.

Cheers,
W.

daviesee

I have just found out that it is going to the airport. :oops:
Now I can see a use.
Last I heard it was stopping at the Gyle.

FWIW Looking at the route, train passengers from across the Forth will still gave to stay on the train going right past the airport all the way to Haymarket, or walk from the Gyle.

wgwarburton

daviesee wrote:

I have just found out that it is going to the airport. :oops:
Now I can see a use.
Last I heard it was stopping at the Gyle.

FWIW Looking at the route, train passengers from across the Forth will still gave to stay on the train going right past the airport all the way to Haymarket, or walk from the Gyle.

Nope. The "Gateway" interchange allows passengers from Fifewards to get on a tram to the airport at Gogar. Passengers from Stirling/Dunblane direction can use Edinburgh Park. I don't know if they'll set up stops for Glasgow trains (few of which currently stop at EDP) or just assume that they'll use Glasgow airport instead!!

Cheers,
W.

First.Aspect

Glasgow trains will drop off at Haymarket to change for the tram to the airport. From much of the east side of the Glasgow area, this will make Edinburgh Airport easier to get to than Glasgow Airport. They will have to build a bigger bar in the departure lounge. Its still a collossal financial fiasco.

Midlothian council has undertaken to provide alternaive cycling facilities to those lost to the Borders rail line. South of Heriot there is a very minor b-road along the route anyway. There are lots of other places to walk dogs.

I did some more research. Dalkeith bypass - 3.5 miles long, £30 million. So, this particular rail line (perhaps not all rail lines) about the same cost per mile as a single lane dual carriageway (I know - why did they bother?). I just don't know why there is so much objection over cost. Given that unlike any possible roads, it can get large numbers of people in and out of the capital, may ease road congestion and is faster than any road (Sunday at midnight excepted) and will bring a bigger jobs market within commuting range of 50,000 people in the Borders, I simply don't understand (a) why Labour object (b) the factual and cost basis for their objections. I mean, how does it compare to the cost of the new bridge?

Interesting to hear the take of people living further out though. I guess I thought there'd be more enthusiasm. If it were to be extended further south and provide a link out to Carlisle or Newcastle, would it receive greater support?

daviesee

Just to continue my earlier rants...

Trains are good alternatives to cars. If the train routes are not going to be used for trains then they are ideal for paved pathways.

Trams - All they had to do was build a new mini-rail station on the Fife line near the airport and add on a tram/monorail shuttle to the terminal. Add on some rolling stock for the early and late fights into/from town and it would have been all sorted.

Anyway, back to the borders........

First.Aspect

daviesee wrote:

Trams - All they had to do was build a new mini-rail station on the Fife line near the airport and add on a tram/monorail shuttle to the terminal. Add on some rolling stock for the early and late fights into/from town and it would have been all sorted.

Indeed. For those who don't know, there is a railway line which passes along the boundary of the airport to the city centre.

The greatest irony of the tram project, no the two greatest ironies... damn I'll come in again. Part of the route uses an old rail line - another example of culling infrastructure in the fairly recent past. Another part of the route uses a very recently built and very expensive set of guided bus lanes which no one can remember wanting, needing or using.

There is a rich history of low calibre Scottish politicians playing in the European and Westminster funded sand pit. A massive reason I don't favour devolution is that I would fear being under the control of a group of politicians who aren't good enough to be MP's.