|
|
|
|---|
Message 1 - posted by CambsHostRena, Dec 9, 2005 So an independent inspector has approved the proposals for the controversial Cambridgeshire guided bus... and councillors say they hope it will be running by 2008.
What do you think? Are you for or against? Do you live near the proposed route? Or can you not wait til it's ready? |
|
|
|
Message 2 - posted by sparky66290, Dec 10, 2005 What a bloody waste of money ! Anyone who knows anything about transport is aware trains are much more likely to attract car users than a bus which is seen as an inferior mode, rail would encourage more integrated journies on to rest of national rail system (who will take suitcases on a bus when travelling to Stansted airport) and allow freight. In Cambridge the bus will get stuck in City traffic anyway so who will pay fares for this when they have a car sitting at home. Watch out for nice council tax bill hikes to fund the £21 million needed but not accounted for this bad joke ! Why are European countries (and Scotland/Wales including re-opening disused lines) investing in rail but not in England. |
|
|
|
|
Message 3 - posted by transportsense, Dec 19, 2005 It would be far more helpful if you read the inspectors report before trotting out the nonsense that rail is the answer in this corridor. If you had done this you would be aware that having heard the supposed case for rail the inspector concluded that "Having heard the evidence, I was left in some considerable doubt about the realism and viability of these proposals and about the ability of heavy rail in general to provide a truly effective service on this particular local route. Moreover, the forecasts of patronage produced for the Inquiry suggest that a heavy rail service would carry significantly fewer passengers than would the CGB, indeed less than half at the peak hour......Fundamentally, the problem for heavy rail would be its inability to serve some key centres of patronage , either at all or as well as the CGB. Thus, in particular, heavy rail would fail to serve Addenbrooke's Hospital, and there would be no link either to the Arbury Park or Clay Farm developments. There would be no direct connection to Cambridge City Centre and St Ives, Huntingdon and Northstowe would be far less well served......Bringing the various heavy rail arguments together, I conclude that rail would be a less suitable option than would the CGB." |
|
|
|
|
Message 4 - posted by IrvineBell, Jul 12, 2006 I really don’t know about the merits of the scheme as a rubber tyred way instead of a railed way. But given the scale and expense of the scheme – it is not just a short section in an otherwise conventional bus route – it really ought to be electric i.e. trolleybus. If it was a light rail scheme it would almost certainly be electric with all the environmental and passenger attractiveness benefits that come with very quiet, very energy efficient zero emission vehicles. If overhead wires are not wanted on street sections in Cambridge, these could be run on battery power as trolleybuses do in central Rome on the new trolleybus system there. The scheme could be electrified for around £0.5 million per km. |
|
|
|
|
Message 5 - posted by spike, Jul 25, 2006 What gets me is that this is the favoured scheme for the eastern region 'pot' and because of the funding it's going to swallow up, the much needed dualling of the last remaining stretch of the A11 has now been put back to 2011. Madness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home
