The tram debate - have your say

This page exists as an archive. If you would like to discuss this or other local topics or issues with other visitors to BBC Nottingham website, please visit our new message board.

See also: Tram archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

	11-October-2002 Speed limits NC absolutely. Where the tram tracks or a roadway are not segregated ie like the ring road then the absolute maximum speed limit of 30m.p.h. should apply. Where there is segregation such as on a motorway (including urban motorways) or a segregated tramway then there can be a higher speed limit. In built up areas dual carriageways are now being subjected to 50m.p.h. (A50 at Stoke, A55 at Colwyn Bay) the same should apply to tramways. These limits should be rigourously enforced with offenders in both categories facing similar penalties. - What happens to a tram driver currently convicted of speeding? Stephanie, Nottingham

	11-October-2002 I live in Bingham, east of Nottingham. Sadly the trams will not benefit me at all in getting to work in West Bridgford. Nothing is ever done to ease our horrendous traffic congestion into Nottingham. It takes me about 45 minutes to travel 8 miles. I would welcome trams coming out to Bingham, but yet again we are overlooked out here. Mrs M Downs, Bingham, Nottingham

	11-October-2002 NC NC I have been reading with interest the comments and debate you started about speed limits, fencing/separation, can you please tell us what are the mistakes that have been made with other systems with regard to speed limits etc. What do you think is appropriate form of seperation to allow limits to be upped from the locality. Who has classified them as mistakes and if its you why are they mistakes, any accident statistics increases/reductions to demonstarte that the HSE the railway inspectorate and professional engineers across the world have got it wrong. doug, Calton

	11-October-2002 NC NC you say my approach is "we have made these mistakes in the past so we should make them again". Why is what been done in the past a mistake, where has it not worked. I notice you have not answered my other questions, can you answer this one burke, west b

	10-October-2002 cycling in tram lines I am a cyclist. I have no fears about the tram rails. What is everyone worried about. I hope everyone who cycles gets used to avoiding them and don't have too many accidents. It's a case of being aware of where you ride like avoiding the kerb stones which can also throw a cyclist off, so, just take a bit of extra care. robert, nottingham

	10-October-2002 tram Why does the BBC publish comments that are so blatantly personal, rude or/and intolerant. I have been bemused by the churlishness of some contributors to this forum over the last few months, we have pro-tram zealots to anti-tram Luddites. It seems that when ordinary people write in with either straightforward questions, or informed answers they get either ridiculed or harangued. I for one will not be visiting this site anymore. Bemused, Nottingham

	11-October-2002 Trams They'll be saying those crop circles are down to trams next. Live and let live, that's what I say. Leave the poor trams alone, they've done no harm. The farmers will shoot at anything if they think the herd's gonna be attacked. They've never done me any harm. I hope they're gonna stop at rampton. Oddjob, Hucknall

	10-October-2002 CW Route Thanks to Burke and Stephanie whose approach to the subject of speed limits seems to be we have made these mistakes in the past so the fact there are anomalies elsewhere means we can apply these to a new project. The Tram is a considerable investment and one issue of paramount importance is safety . New residential areas are subject to 30 mph for vehicles ,so new trams in new residential areas should run an a similar basis. And Mr Bennett safety is a somewhat subjective issue and from my experience of dealing with the rail authorities one on which they take a more lienient view than myself. I have seen the artist sketches for the proposed route and don’t consider this adequate but we will no doubt get some ‘expert’ views on the subject at the Public Enquiry. NC, Nottingham

	10-October-2002 Neighbourhood News I've just read last night's Neighbourhood News articles. The BCBRA people don't seem to have any new or reasonable arguments - better scrap the tram because NET can't yet publish a full timetable - 5 years before operations begin! What a pathetic argument! BACIT - once again your academic Chardonet swilling credentials come through, you can't stop aiming at the unconvinced Guardian reader not the Mail or Sun reader, you're dead right of course but out of touch! But the worst of all BCT whoever wrote that should be locked up! Total rubbish. Find a vulnerable section of society, the elderly, and put the frighteners on. Totally immoral claptrap. I just hope the public have enough sense to see through it and condemn them utterly. Jim, Beeston

	10-October-2002 The Wilford tram The MP whom ENT members met last Saturday has a disdain of trams in general and CW in particular. He thinks the tram will be little use to Compton Acres, since there will be "only" two stops. i think two stops would have a catchment covering most of the estate, except 100 houses plus at the southern end, which even then are within walking distance of a third stop on Ruddington Lane. The other local MP favours the trams, including CW. One MP is right, the other wrong. Let us see. G. Bennett, Wilford

	10-October-2002 Nottingham NET After reading everybody elses comments on the NET I decided to make a few of my own. Firstly this is not a waste of money but an investment in the future, fair enough it may cause you some minor inconvienience for a while but it will cut pollution in the city and therefore stop many children from suffering crippling cases of asthma and other related disease, this then gives knock on effects to less pressure on the NHS etc! To the person who says it is causing them trouble in selling their house maybe you should look again and see if it is the house that is a problem, as I have just bought a house in the last few weeks and I can guarantee you that all the houses on the proposed tram routes were selling faster than we could look at them. Finally I believe that anyone with further complaints on this subject should do a bit of background reading on a subject called SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT!!! Nottingham

	10-October-2002 Trams Is it me or has the world gone barking mad? Why oh why have they spent millions on a new tram system when the money could have been better spent making TelePods like the ones in the film "The Fly". The only people who will use the tram will be bank robbers trying to make a quick getaway from our boys in blue. Will we be getting Police trams aswell, I doubt it. No doubt there'll be a debate on Pigeons next. It's all gone mad. oddjob, Hucknall

	09-October-2002 ENT event Saturday 5 October It was interesting to note that the ENT Group in Compton Acres invited to their rally last Saturday an MP who was a senior member of a succession of governments that left this country’s transport infrastructure in ruins. Good grief - it’s like the RSPCA inviting Bernard Matthews to join a campaign to make Christmas vegetarian. Give up, ENT. You have no feet left in which to shoot yourselves. David, Wilford

	09-October-2002 Cyclists Not concerned: You may be interested to learn that a survey was conducted in Sheffield and found no higher incidence of cycle accidents on raods with tramlines than those without. Croydon has the lowest rate of cycle accidents of any London Borough. However, we should push NET through Pedals and BACIT (BCBRA & BCT too if they can do anything positive) to allow cycles on trams. Have you seen Waverley Street in Nottingham now it's finished? Steve Barber, Beeston

	09-October-2002 The Tram Are the BBC really dumbing down or was there nothing to report the other night. The story about cyclists getting trapped in the Tram lines...I ask you. The Dutch over in Amsterdam have tram lines criss-crossing their city like a spiders web add that to a cycling population in the tens of thousands...hundreds of people must get trapped in trams lines and run over by trams everyday.....well I don't think so or Holland would have banned trams by now. Another attempt to vilify the tram even before it is off the ground. Not Concerned of Chilwell, Cheerful Chilwell

	09-October-2002 ENT and Mr Clarke I read in the post about Mr Clarke and ENT and their preferred route. Two points Mr Clarke was chancellor when the treasuray drove through (Mr Portillo) the format used to privatise our rail system. He also was involved in tory policy Roads to Prosperity, so I would not put his views down as beeing a good indicator of sensible transport policy. Point two Who are ent trying to kid with a queens drive route. It has been stated on this board that the sole reason for promoting this route is they know it would kill it. Who are they trying to kid. mf, chilwell

	09-October-2002 Reply to dane Dane I have been considering your reply to me and I am sorry I make you sick (as you stated in you last note to the board), you clearly seem to have a weak gag reflex, I am also sorry that I failed to pick up you had already said you would not use the tram. Whilst you may not agree with me I am entitled to my view which actually is I want to have a decent logical argument on the pros and cons and a sensible debate, unfortunately Dane dubious testimony does not constitute debate. I am concerned that you are worried about your job, I am also concerned that you clearly must speed to get to work, (10mins Clifton to Chilwell) particularly someone as prone to bilious attacks as you, it could be very dangerous. I don’t want to see any one loose their job, have you got evidence from your boss that your firm will be forced to close, has that been sated to you? I am also worried that some of the emotional unsubstantiated fears spread by the anti tram groups are obviously generating si! gnificant concern. You seem to know a lot about the traders on Chilwell road, do you know Mr Willoughby who is mentioned from BCBRA I believe he shares the same fears as you. Finally Dane you are wrong to say the tram will not affect people like me, it will. Line one and three will save me five hours a week on my trip to work, as well as the 50 other people I share my bus with evry day, and the hundreds/thousands of other people who try to use our current public transport system at peak hour. All this extra free time may even give us more time to visit the businesses on Chilwell high road, after all the journey there should be quite painless if line three gets built, but at the moment I am sorry I don’t and wont use these shops as its too much of a pain to get there. Floating Voter, Notts

	09-October-2002 Speed NC wrote "so in the case of going through a residential area this should be 30 mph." Are you therefore in favour of reducing the speed limit on the Ring Road, Derby Road which cannot be described as anything other than residential areas? Do you support the speed cameras? Would you propose a recorder linked to a GPS system in every car with instant prosecution for speeding? Stephanie, Nottingham

	09-October-2002 Experts It's amasing how we are so blessed with so many experts in Nottingham NC, PAS, Insider they must have a vast experience - far more than 100 odd years of the railway inspectorate, the 25 or so years of operating experience in Manchester, Croydon & Sheffield. The thousands of years of combined experience of all the engineers, researchers and academics who have done extensive research into modern tramway systems throughout the world. I know who I trust. Steve Barber, Beeston

	09-October-2002 No PT in Nottingham That's an interesting thought Philip. I'm not sure you meant vote though(perhaps survey?). I'm also not sure if this is a joke. Do you really think all public transport runs around empty, just slowing down "everyone"? I wouldn't have thought it would take a genius to work out that if everyone who currently goes by bus or train went by car there'd be one hell of a traffic jam and nowhere to park, ignoring all the environmental and safety issues. Besides, you're looking at households, not individuals. Remember that not everyone in a household travels to the same place at the same time and not every individual has a car. Stanley, Basford, Nottingham

	09-October-2002 Off-street tram running NC, why can't the trams run up to 50 mph off-street? Trains on heavy rail can run much faster, as they did in the past on Wilford embankment. Housing each side of the tracks does not produce danger. And what about conductor-rail electrified systems, as with the Southern Electric or surface parts of the (so-called) London Underground? And don't tell me street crossings make 30mph imperative for up to half a mile each side. Geoffrey Bennett, Wilford

	09-October-2002 So Nc Back to my original question, if the trains running through beeston rylands attenborough, bramcoat, lenton, long eaton etc etc run on track segregated by a low stranded wire fence all adjacent to houses and associated link roads should they go at the same speed as the adjacent traffic limit? Can you define appropriate segregation, what has been defined as suitable (or unsuitable) and who has defined it you or net. What has been deemed appropriate for other systems in the UK, in such circumstances, (off road but near houses/parks), brick walls, wooden posts, razor wire, armed guards?. Should Nottingham be different to what works else where and and is accepted design across the rest of the world?. burke, West B

	08-October-2002 Sound investments PAS I suggest that you try to persuade BCBRA to buy a spill chucker with some of this £250K from the oil company or whoever. AM, Toton

	08-October-2002 CW Route Burke,the point simply is that the Tram should be limited to the speed of other vehicles in the area ,so in the case of going through a residential area this should be 30 mph.I don’t think the mass of houses in Compton acres can be classified as anything else.If a tram happens to run on the A60 it would seem reasonable that whatever speed limit applies to that road should apply to the tram. My previous note was a response to someone advising the route through Compton acres would be totally segregated and therefore the tram should be allowed to run at faster speeds than those deemed safe for elsewhere on the estate According to the NET literature this level of segregation does not exist and so this assertion does not appear applicable to this part of the route.. NC, Nottingham

	08-October-2002 NC your point was if the tram is in an area where the public may gain access, (in a park, by a footpath, next to a cycle track or pavemnet it should be limited to 30mph). The A60 goes through an area with houses, with pavements clifton bridge and university boulevard have cycle paths and footpaths. Therefore your argument for the tram is valid for other vehicles they too should have a 30mph limit. So should should these location be 30mph and if not why should the tram either. Burke, West B

	08-October-2002 CW debate There is an article in Monday’s Evening Post about a meeting the Wilford tram objectors had last Saturday with one of the MPs. This was a publicity exercise lobbying the Transport Secretary. The cost of CW is £94 million and the calculated benefits are £136 million. With a social surplus of £42 million, what other alternative public transport improvements could show a better return on the same investment? As ever, the CW objectors inflate the wildlife issue. The embankment would have to be an international breeding and feeding ground with the rarest flora and fauna, an outstanding European Site or wetland, to have any chance of defeating the tram. As it is, the wildlife is rather common and highly resilient, able to be assimilated in fresh tree planting at small cost. When embankment south is demolished, the displaced animals will seek refuge in back gardens in Wilford. That is exactly what happened 15 years ago when the Compton Acres housing was built. The em! bankment objectors think Queens Drive is a better way to route a tram to Clifton. Well they would, wouldn’t they? They would not use it themselves - and nor would most of the workers and shoppers on QD, since they live scattered far and wide over the Nottingham area. Bridging the Trent is too expensive with CQD. The costs of this route exceed benefits by £48 million, making it ineligible for government funding. Even the wildlife on the south Trent bank next to CQD is comparable to CW – a fat lot the embankment protesters care about that. No wonder the Councils and NET are unconvinced by the CW protest. Geoffrey Bennett, Wilford

	08-October-2002 nottingham transport Nottingham city does not need public transport a recent vote has shown so. There is a car in nearly every house in Nottingham all public transport does is slow people down when they are in a hurry to get to somewhere philip green, nottingham

	07-October-2002 CW Route I know the theory that the area for the tram will be clear but this theory is exactly the same as not blocking off the traffic lights at the junction of Compton Acres and Wilford Lane. At present with the road works you can’t turn right and you can’t turn left in rush hour ,with a new crossing a mere 50 m away this will only exasperate the position. I am only advocating 30 mph in residential areas and as the route goes right next to a housing estate and childrens playing fields I don’t think this is unreasonable. I fail to see the relevance of the A 60 or University Boulevard which are not residentail areas. NC, Nottingham

	07-October-2002 NC's points 1) The tram is not going to remove all traffic however it will remove a significant amount if it is properly built. It will have an effect on traffic coming out of Compton Acres estate and traffic originating from Wilford. 2)Unfortunately at the moment line 4 is on hold (which means that all the people affected on that route are in limbo) so there will be only a small impact on Football & Cricket traffic but this will flow more freely due to 1) above 3) Perhaps you could clear up this public walkway business. I read in tonight's Evening Post that residents are claiming loss of footpaths, but you say a footpath will be made and claim this as a negative. Which is it to be? You know and we all know that the tramway will have to pass the Railway inspectorate's examination which is very tight indeed. Off road (and on road) sections of tramways are very safe indeed. 4) I can't see any significant extra hold ups, in fact there will probably be less as fewer cars are turning out of Compton Acres and Wilford village. The time taken for a tram to cross with up to 130 car loads of people is tiny in comparison to the time taken for the cars to pass. Steve Barber, Beeston

	07-October-2002 PAS ramblings PAS wrote;"....my evidence albiet small will be of an enviromental nature withing the limits of my expertise.." you should have omited the enviro... I trust they will not judge by one's ability to spell! I've a feeling this public enquiry will be over in a very short time. Jim, Beeston

	07-October-2002 Oh dear NC if you build the tram you put in traffic management systems to control the movemnet of traffic to free crossing points, and you alter/change some junctions its quite simple. I know that the antis from Compton acres think the tram should have a man with a red flag walking infront, but it does not need much of an imagination to realise its not a problem. also have you any facts to share on patronage reduction in car removal current trip patterns. If not how can you make most of the points you do. If you are right then the Cost benefit analysis done by net based on givernment rules would not have come out positive. doug, carlton

	07-October-2002 The old tram map Why should this cause a debate? Surely we have enough heritage place is Nottingham to hang it. The problem with the council members and such like is that they have nothing better to do. If thsi turns into a time wasting scenario then we must look at where we hang our local leaders. Then I'm sure there would be plenty of suggestions then! Clive , Bramcote

	07-October-2002 Tram To Floater Voter Notts, You have convinced me that NET should be anonymous. So I withdraw my to question, although we both agree PR could be improved. As for the Cator lane reversal, those whose homes border the present core route (behind Broxtowe College) were orignally under the impression, I believe from NET, that that route was not tenable. So they did see a need to write to NET. Then NET switches to aforementioned the route, we are told due to the concerns of residents of Cator Lane, when it was too late for the other residents to voice they opposition. Even though the presently proposed route required compulsary purchase of three homes, and runs in close proxmity to two complexes for the elderly. Of whom neither sets of residents will benefit as there will not be stops outside theri dorrs like those in Sandy Court. Is not the tram meant to be serving the less able?Then their is the issue of a substantial loss of trees, copse and what is essentially a buffer for pollut! ion and haven for local wildlife for the neabry residents. As well as a screen ofr privacy, this has taken 10s of year to grownot a few. I hope the tram is successful, and I want it for Chilwell but other more important routes have been dismissed. As for the Imperial Road option that was a slightly facetious suggestion, given for someone with more experties than myself to question. To SB, my evidence albiet small will be of an enviromental nature withing the limits of my expertise. Is is not to be seen as anti-tram just anti-route. If the green corridor of Chiwell, was disused industrail brown field, I say a tram route would be its best reuse. But unfortunatley it is not. A tram on a road reduces the congestion, pollution and noise for all those who live along it, so pleas keep trams to roads. After all once in the city center it will all be on roads anyway. PAS,

	07-October-2002 Tram speed NC If the tram is off road and segregated from footpaths why should 30mph apply, The mainline railway into nottingham has footpaths and green space adjacent to it and is fenced by a low 3 strand wire fence. I repeat should that have a 30mph limit. Should the 40mph limit on university boulevard/derby road, or the A60 through West B be reduced to 30 due to adjacent footpaths/cycle tracks etc etc, should the limit on clifton bridge where there is a segregated path be reduced from 60 to 30mph. burke , west b

	07-October-2002 Wilford Lane Over a year ago NET employed consultants to consider the feasibility of a street crossing at Wilford Lane on CW. Of course a crossing is a much cheaper expedient than a bridge and there will be no restricted headroom. (The old railway bridge was 14 feet 9 inches headroom – I remember it well). The street crossing will be co-ordinated with the other traffic lights on the Lane, and the City/County highways authorities raise no objection. In answer to NC, of course it is difficult for people living in the vicinity of Wilford Lane to avoid using this road. That is precisely what is wrong with communication around Wilford at present – two overloaded bridges across the Trent, one road access only into Wilford village and likewise Silverdale, and the Trent, Fairham Brook, ring road and embankment all acting as physical barriers. Let the embankment be converted into a modern transport artery, an original link – let’s get people mobile. As for sports traffic, this is not an eve! ryday occurance, and on-street parking for it effects the northern end of the Lane outside the CW catchment anyway. CW is wholly off-street around Wilford, and the steam trains in the past were faster than 50mph – yet with no noise or safety problems. Why do the trams have to be slowed down alongside a proposed new footpath segregated by close boarded fencing and a 6 feet verge? As a personal view, the new footpath proposed on the Wilford side of the tramline might just as well be scrapped for all the use I can see for it – put in more bunding and trees for the amenity of the residents adjacent instead. As for road traffic queues on the Lane, the carriageway will have a yellow box at the tram crossing, the tram stop will be visible enough, and of course the trams have traffic priority. Geoffrey Bennett, Wilford

	07-October-2002 Wilford Lane Over a year ago NET employed consultants to consider the feasibility of a street crossing at Wilford Lane on CW. Of course a crossing is a much cheaper expedient than a bridge and there will be no restricted headroom. (The old railway bridge was 14 feet 9 inches headroom – I remember it well). The street crossing will be co-ordinated with the other traffic lights on the Lane, and the City/County highways authorities raise no objection. In answer to NC, of course it is difficult for people living in the vicinity of Wilford Lane to avoid using this road. That is precisely what is wrong with communication around Wilford at present – two overloaded bridges across the Trent, one road access only into Wilford village and likewise Silverdale, and the Trent, Fairham Brook, ring road and embankment all acting as physical barriers. Let the embankment be converted into a modern transport artery, an original link – let’s get people mobile. As for sports traffic, this is not an eve! ry! day occurance, and on-street parking for it effects the northern end of the Lane outside the CW catchment anyway. CW is wholly off-street around Wilford, and the steam trains in the past were faster than 50mph – yet with no noise or safety problems. Why do the trams have to be slowed down alongside a proposed new footpath segregated by close boarded fencing and a 6 feet verge? As a personal view, the new footpath proposed on the Wilford side of the tramline might just as well be scrapped for all the use I can see for it – put in more bunding and trees for the amenity of the residents adjacent instead. As for road traffic queues on the Lane, the carriageway will have a yellow box at the tram crossing, the tram stop will be visible enough, and of course the trams have traffic priority. Geoffrey Bennett, Wilford

	07-October-2002 CW TRAM A couple of follow up points from responses to my Friday e mail. 1. It will be difficult to use a different route to Wilford Lane if you live on it or immediately adjacent to it. 2. I don’t believe the tram will directly serve either the football or cricket grounds so I can’t see it having any impact on this volume of traffic . 3. The ‘sweetness & light ‘ portrayals of the CW line after it is finished as depicted in the NET literature shows public walkways adjacent to the line ,there is no segregation and therefore residential traffic speeds should apply. 4. Further interruptions to the traffic flow on Wilford Lane every 5 minutes will cause additional congestion ,indeed it is difficult to see how the tram will get through ,as the proposed crossing point is generally covered by stationary traffic in the busy periods. It could not get out of the way of a tram if it wanted to.The traffic is generally outbound to areas which will not be served by the tra! m. NC, Nottingham

	07-October-2002 The Tram Seems that the NET have ditched local MP Nick Palmers idea of an alternative route.I only assume this because I have got a leaflet from NET about the proposed new routes. Roll on the public inquiry when all the bluff and bluster will be blown away and the case for the tram will be won or lost on FACTS. Not Concerned of Chilwell, Chilwell

	07-October-2002 "Closing" Wilford Lane Pt2 NC's comment about "closing" Wilford Lane illustrates the ignorance some of the antis have of tram operation. If they had visited Croydon with BACIT they would see that tram crossings operate just like traffic lights at pedestrian crossings, with cars stopped for a similar time. I imagine the anti brigade construct visions of mainline level crossings with 10-car HSTs going past, delaying cars for 5 minutes or more. Currently, when the football's on and there are long queues on Wilford Lane, how much extra delay does stopping at pelican crossings really add to your journey? None. The limiting factors are the other existing junctions. You need to see working trams if you want to argue against (or for) them. Any chance of another trip Geoffrey (of YES!)? Stanley, Basford, Nottingham

	07-October-2002 Speed restrictions The ENT leaflet states "...All other traffic in this are is governed by a 30 mph limit" ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. The nearby A52 dual carriageway is NOT. Please at least get your facts straight!!!!!!! Jim, Beeston

	06-October-2002 Traffic congestion If the antis are basing their objections around the assumption that the trams will create traffic congestion then they are obviously going to fail. Anyone who's ever read anything into the subject or visited anywhere where there is a modern tramway will soon tell you - A modern tramway cuts down on car usage and hence reduces congestion. Have any of ENT ever visited a modern tramway system? How many of them came to Croydon to meet the experts? I can't recall any. How did their meeting go with Mr Clarke - is he now convinced? S.B., Beeston

	05-October-2002 Tram Speed Limits Remember that Road Speed Limits are just that - Limits. In many cases, 30mph would be totally inappropriate for the conditions. Tram Speed Limits are set by experts based on the braking and sighting distances and the conditions and whilst they remain limits, they will be lower if it is not alwayse safe to operate faster. For exaple, Church Street in Croydon has a 35kph speed limit for trams but a 30mph limit for cars. The trams stick to their limit, the cars don't and the road is just the same. In an open area where the tramway has some demarkation - a low fence or similar, why shouldn't the tram go faster. At Lloyd Park on Tramlink, the trams have a small wooden log fence (1 foot high perhaps) with 50mph (80kph) limit where as the road which is unfaced and has side roads and a pavement is 30mph - the drivers always speed! Just remember that trams follow speed limits set and those limits are set according to conditions with no blanket limits applied. In an ideal world, car speed limits should be set in the same way with speed limiters but that's unlikely to happen. Where trams run In street, they will run at the same speed of cars or less although I think I read somewhere that it was legal to have higher limits. SJP, West Wickham, Kent

	04-October-2002 Tram Debate - Lorry Braking FF - I'm still waiting for the manufacturers to get back to me (if they ever do). Internet research has not turned up any figures, but it does suggest the figures will not be hugely different to those of cars, particularly as some large vehicle manufacturers employ sophisticated variable valve timing to increase the power of engine braking. It's ridiculously difficult to get hold of braking figures... The Insider, Nottingham

	04-October-2002 Cars are restricted to 30mph on roads which have open access to people. If you follow this arguement to a logical conculsion should railtrack limit all urban rail lines to 30mph. BURKE, west B

	04-October-2002 "Closing" Wilford Lane The speed limit in urban areas is to protect pedestrians on pavements and drivers from the many more hazards on urban streets compared to rural areas. A fenced off tram will be much safer as it will avoid these hazards, but even so the speed limit will be dependent on the surroundings. Trams have impeccable safety records compared to cars. As for "closing" Wilford Lane every few minutes, remember we already have "closures" due to traffic lights and pelican crossings. If it was a grade-separated motorway installing traffic lights to allow the tram to cross would clearly cause a problem. But since there are already traffic lights and pelican crossings on the street the difference will be tiny. In particular, the traffic lights at Compton Acres already "close" the road every few minutes and that serves fewer people than the tram will. Remember, this is a tram, not a mainline railway. Besides, the tram is far more efficient in people crossing the road/minute than cars on! t! he road (or even pedestrian crossings!). Those concerned about traffic congestion should really support the tram which will improve matters. Stanley, Basford, Nottingham

	04-October-2002 and whats more If your traffic is held up on Wilford Lane, don't you think that the motorists will soon get the message and travel on a different route !!!! simple Robert, Beeston

	04-October-2002 ENT vs CW YES Yesterday I was out delivering leaflets for CW YES and three things particularly stick in my mind: Firstly we came across an ENT (anti) display and left it alone but did put up 3 of our own posters. Within 10 minutes our posters were ripped down, so we replaced them. I believe in democracy, clearly not everyone shares my view. Secondly the ENT leaflet talks of the tram having a MAXIMUM speed of 50m.p.h. (it will of course be much less in many locations with limits as low as 10m.p.h) this is probably half the max speed of most road vehicles- remember the trams have spies in the cabs most cars don't. Only a few yards away is a 70m.p.h. road which is a constant noise problem. If the tram reduces this traffic then there is an improvement to the environment. Thirdly afterwards we walked along the wide embankment and then cycled into town along what will be the route. A more obvious way for a tram is hard to imagine. Once the tram is running the residents of Wilford and Compton Acres will have a fantastically quick journey into Nottingham, in fact they'll be there by the time their cars would have got them to somewhere near the current park & ride - if they're lucky. It's madness to object. Steve Barber, Beeston

	04-October-2002 reply to N.C N C jaffic hold ups and jams is one of the reasons we need the tram. So thats blasted your ship out the water !!! Robert, Beeston

	04-October-2002 Lorry braking Insider on 27 Sept you promised "I will try to get some figures from bus and truck manufacturers." Have you yet got any of these figures? FF, Beeston

	04-October-2002 Trams In response to AW the answer is none. It seems perfect sense to me that if cars are restricted to 30 mph in a residential area then the same should apply to the tram. The congestion on Wilford Lane at the moment through minor roadworks is appalling ,closing the road every few minutes for a tram would undoubtedly have a similar effect. I can’t believe NET have looked at this seriously given the glib way they describe this road closure in their consultation literature. They really ought to visit this route during rush hour or when the football is on for a sense of reality. NC, Nottingham

	04-October-2002 Tram – Spot the antis’ fibs I give the text below of the October 2002 ‘Environment Not Trams Newsletter’ because its half truths, nonsense and self inflicted wounds reveal the yawning inadequacy of the south of the river ‘Stop the Tram’ minority cause. How many dishonest claims can you spot? 50 MPH THROUGH YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD! ‘NET say 50 mph’ NET have now revealed their intention to run the tram at up to 50 mph along the Wilford Lane/Compton Acres section of the Clifton via Wilford route. This is despite the claims on their website (see below) that tram speeds will be very carefully assessed relative to the surrounding environment and reduced if close to residential areas. Don’t forget that, if the route is given the go ahead, the nature trail embankment along this section will be totally removed and the tram will run at street level with a footpath and cycle track alongside. Running at these speeds will have enormous implications for increased intrusion caused! b! y the noise of the tram. More important are the safety implications. All other traffic in this are is governed by a 30 mph limit The tram is 100 feet long and weighs 50 tons. Its emergency stopping distance is clearly considerably greater than a car and since it runs on tracks it obviously can’t manoeuvre to avoid an accident. ‘Dear Darling’ We support the need to improve public transport provision and to provide alternatives to car use in city centres. However we want to see that these alternatives are viable and will not introduce other damaging environmental impacts as a result of their implementation. If you feel the same then join us and make your views known at the top’. Alistair Darting is the Secretary of Sate for Transport and will decide whether NET are given public money to build this route. On Saturday 5 October we’ll be holding a letter-signing event at Compton Acres shops to let Mr Darting know our concerns tout a possible tram rou! te! through Compton Acres and Wilford. Join us please between 10:30 and 12:00. Rushcliffe MP Kenneth Clarke will be there at 11 am to show his support. ‘Taste of things to come’ Seen the traffic hold-ups during the roadworks along Wilford Lane at the moment? Well imagine what it’ll be like when the tram is crossing every few minutes. And the tram has priority... ‘Netballs’. ‘It has been noted that some people have been worried by the thought that the tram could travel at 50 mph through their area. 50 mph is the top speed that the tram could reach, when running off street. Tram speeds would be very carefully assessed relative to the surrounding environment and if ie speed would be reduced to reflect particular conditions such as close proximity to residential areas. On street the tram would strictly observe pre-set speed limits and often run well below them.’ - Quote from the NET website. AW, Nottm

	04-October-2002 The 1930 Tram map - could it be housed in the Nottingham Castle Museum? Jose Mason,

	04-October-2002 NET As local government officials I would have thought NET should remain in the background, like the civil service there job is to collectively carryout (impartially) the decisions of the elected councillors. Obviously if you start to show the experience background etc of the staff involved in the work, then people who like to pick over the minutia of the work or like to cleverly try dam with faint praise, whilst pretending to be supportive, would then start to call into question their qualifications and experience, usually falsely, to state or imply they are not qualified to do the job. (It has happened in the past and with those that do this, doing so normally from a position of total ignorance) We know that facts don’t tend to be high on the anti tram groups priorities so I think to put NETs staff in this position would be unfair on those who are only undertaking their work, the accountability for their work comes in at the enquiry, and the councils job is to promote the sche! me! . Ultimately weather we like it or not its the councillors who make the decisions, and NET have to produce the best solutions to meet the requirements and rules for funding. I would assume because of the nature of the work the more senior people in NET will all be professionally qualified, usually Chartered Civil engineers, transport planners, etc etc etc. The consultants they will be using will all be subject specialists and will all be lead by professionally qualified technical managers, the names I have seen mentioned are all leading well know companies within their field. It is true net superficially do not appear good at the PR side of things etc but they way they undertake consultation and when they can issue information is strictly controlled by the government rules etc. From my experience of road schemes in the distant past. NET are better than most, but i dont think that can be a defence and there is always room for improvement. Floating Voter, notts

	04-October-2002 Old Tram Map Hang it in the Castle or Wollaton hall P Aspinshaw, Nottingham/Wilford

	04-October-2002 tram poster make it a feature of the Broad Marsh refurbishment brian litherland, nottingham

	03-October-2002 Answered & Unanswered questions PAS, you were asking questions which have been answered regarding the routes & destinations. I suggest that you visit our web-site http://www.bacit.org and we have links to the press releases regarding the Toton Route. Of course you don't need us to contact NET, I gave you the contact details and we would prefer you to contact them direct, but we are prepared to assist. However, you then say that you can't see the point - what came out of the consultation? - the route was altered away from Cator Lane and an extra stop was proposed at Imperial Road. Also their indications were that a sizable number of people wanted the tram. Not enough people who live near the Cator lane area said they wanted a stop and many said they wouldn't use the tram so a stop has been omitted. That is an error and one which I want to see corrected. Assurances-have we assurances of anything in this world? However, NET will have to publish detailed plans for the TWAO and we shall all have the oportunity ! to! see them and comment at the public enquiry. However, we cannot that anonymously! I'm looking forward to it. PAS I await with baited breath for a more detailed analysis of your previous route suggestion - Imperial Road, Ireton St etc.(23 Sept) Steve Barber, Beeston

	03-October-2002 Say YES to the CW tram! As regular readers of this column are aware, a small number of people living along Wilford embankment do not think a tramline should go where a busy mainline railway once ran. The campaign has been very vocal, but thoroughly unintellectual. For those who support the Clifton-Wilford (CW) tram route, a new group has been created called CW YES! For more information, a new website is available http://yestothetram.tripod.com/. (NB there is no www in the address). Additionally, I can be contacted by email gben001@hotmail.com Say YES to the CW tram! Say YES to a tram for Clifton, Wilford and Compton Acres! Geoffrey Bennett, Chair, CW YES!, Wilford

	03-October-2002 tram Steve, You are getting rather impatient, you surprise me? No, my question was not answered, or if it was I did not see the reply. I asked a simple question of who are the NET team and what are their qualifications, which I think would make for very good customer relations if this was on the NET site, since they may read this site they could amend their WEB site accordingly. Why do we have to go through BACIT to contact NET, we don't? We can write directly or meet them personally, we do not need your assistance. I could meet the NET team but why. We had a consultation period over a year ago, but for all the positive suggestions nothing seems to have changed, no open public debate on route options no extra detail, no stop at Cator Lane, just a sea of paper. You state the tram has good access for disabled and the elderly but will there really be a stop at Cator Lane, after all this will only slow the tram down and it may not meet set criteria. What assurances do we have that other stops planned will be build, in fact what assurances do we have for much of the prosecution of the proposal. I do not belong to or have ever attended a BCBRA meeting nor a BACIT one, nor do I intend to. Both can spin a tale pro or con as much as they like, using what ever figures they choose to manipulate. Croydon is not Chilwell, each tram system has to be uniquely tailored to the demands of the community and geography. By all means go and compare but it is like comparing oranges and lemons. I have lived in and commuted to enough European cities, including those with trams in this country to see the advantages of well managed and carefully planned tram systems. As for now I will now wait until the Public enquiry when I will present my own evidence. See you then. PAS, In transit

	02-October-2002 Carillion Dont worry all you folks in Beeston/Chilwell. When the tram works start Carillion will have little or no impact on your daily lives. I live in the Hyson Green area and know this to be fact. As my journey to work in the morning was already blighted with delay usually by lazy deadbeats in single occupancy cars (an extension of their living room)blocking up the small roads into town. At least with the tram works there is some light at the end of the tunnel. As for some compensation for the "trouble" isnt the 15% increase in your house price enough? Not being driven by greed myself the chance to get to work on time will be reward enough for me. At £360 per year for my bus ticket (which will also work on the tram at no extra cost) it is a bargain which is hard to surpass. When the city council start charging all of the single occupancy car drivers to park in town (maybe as much as a thousand pounds per year) you wont be wailing the tram is a bad idea then will you? Tram Warrior, Hyson Green

	02-October-2002 Trams AW .Thanks for the info,I suppose the Councils concern is 25 % of what ? When will they have to sign up for the 30 year mortgage ,is it 25 % of a fixed amount or can it keep going up ? Will future governments move the goalposts so the contribution mix changes ,for example,just look what the current one did with Pension Funds ,saying they had to abide by MFR and then removing tax credits on ACT,costing companies millions ,could anything similar happen here under the PFI guise ? JC, West Bridgford

	02-October-2002 Danes worries Dane: Regarding your journey; we've covered this before. You probably will be better to continue using the car. However, without the tram the traffic will get worse & worse and you won't be able to do it in 10 mins (I don't believe that anyhow without breaking the speed limit). You will therefore benefit as a non-user. Regarding your employment - why will your company go bust? In other cities there has been no higher incidence of bankruptcies along tram routes. Along line 1 at the height of the disruptions there were fewer empty shops on Radford Road with the tram (20%) than Alfreton Road (30%) or Radford Road without the tram (40%). What is your bosses concern? Has he asked NET? I am very sorry that this is causing you stress but this has been the tactic of the antis - find someone vulnerable, worried for their job, elderly, young parents etc. and start relating frightening stories. I've seen them in action in an old persons home and was disgusted. I'm sorry that you are a victim. The Christian shop, mini-market and others MAY have to re-locate. If they play their cards right this should end up to their benefit. Walter Hayes re-located 3 times, each time getting a substantial re-fit. My accountant re-located when his old premises were knocked down for additional parking - he's never looke! d ! back. One final thought 80% of commercial investment in Sheffield is within half a mile of the tram. Incidentally, I live very close to the tram and will have to contend with all the disruption much more than most. Also a substantial part of my business interests and investment portfolio are directly on the tram route. If it flops I stand to lose but I'm confident.....and look forward to increased prosperity for us ALL Steve Barber., Beeston

	02-October-2002 House Prices Todays Post Headline - 28%. So house prices are going mad and that's not necessarily a good thing but a couple of quotes from an estate agent are interesting: "Forest Fields has amazed me. I can't believe the prices we are acheiving there. A 2 bedroomed house would go for £28,000 18 months ago now you're looking at £60,000 to £65,000" (76% p.a.!!!!!) and referring to Sneinton & Forest Fields "Mrs Jones said good transport and proximity to the city centre were key factors...." So this is when the tramworks are at their worst and all the doom & gloom merchants ought to be having a field day. If the tram goes ahead and lines 2,3,4 & 5 at least are built then what a city! Stephanie, Nottingham

	02-October-2002 PAS comments PAS once again you are asking questions that have already been answered. Do you expect Colin Lea, Pat Armstrong, Stephen Barker, Neil Bates etc. of NET to come knocking on your door? I hope they've all got better things to do. Have you taken the trouble to meet them. They were at the Green Festival, The market square, and will be at the Goose Fair. They can be contacted on 915 6600 or tram@nottinghamcity.gov.uk Have you bothered to contact them? If you have a question. We(BACIT) have an ask NET address AskNet@bacit.org where we are compiling the top 10 questions to ask NET - have you contacted us? Did you come to our public meeting in May?or did you take the BCBRA advice and boycott it? Did you come to Croydon? This is the trouble with the Chilwell antis you will not ask, you will not listen, you cannot argue from a position of knowledge your arguments are therefore hollow and you are losing. All you can do is rake up the same worn-out failed discredited arguments time & ti! me! again. If this is the strength of your case then £250,000 for a barrister is going to be woefully inadequate against the facts. Steve Barber., Beeston

	02-October-2002 Tram In reply to floating voter, I have already stated in this column that it would take me nearly one hour to get from Clifton to Beeston by tram but I can do the same journey in 10 minutes by car. But this is all immaterial, because the retail company I work for, and have done for the past 17 years, would not be able to sustain the build process of laying down tram lines and the major road alterations that would have to be made on Chilwell Rd. Even if we could keep operating during this period, trade would be almost non existent and I know that my employers would not be able to pay my wages. So,floating voter, I will be out of work with no need to travel to Beeston,wether by tram or car, and you call this progress? Tell my wife and familly that this is progress. I dare say that there are many other people in the same position as me, and what I would like to know is, who is going to compensate me and the others like me? I'll tell you who; NOBODY. Floating voter, you feel that I ! should be stress free. Well I can tell you that I am quite the opposite.People like you make me sick. You are all in favour of the tram because it doesn't affect your lives in any way and all you people say to me is that I am a NIMBY. It would be interesting to see how many of you pro trammers were still pro tram if the tram was coming straight past your front door, or if your place of business had to be demolished to make way for the tram (re Christian Bookshop), or if it meant that you lost your job. I don't think that there would be so many people on the tram bandwagon then. So, stop shouting how great the tram scheme is and spare a thought for the poor sods whose lives are going to be devastated if the tram comes to Beeston and Chilwell. People only oppose something because they have valid reasons to. Start listening to reasoning. Dane, Clifton

	02-October-2002 The Tram to Chilwell My last Labour county councillor said he has to represent the views of all he constituents and would have to keep his personal views on the tram underwraps, sadly he died allowing the Tories to get their man/boy in. Who I might add stood on an anti-tram ticket, which means that all the pro-tram voters of Chilwell are without a voice now, as their County Councillor is so anti-tram. So if the tram is scuppered what is his answer to the ever growing number of cars on our roads. "On yer bike might" may be a shout from Cllr Jackson. Cllr Jackson works for a company thats sells cars, does Cllr Jackson fear for the loss of his employment if the tram were to be built? Cllr Jackson should get behind Nick Palmer MP and back the alternative route through Beeston to Toton that may cost more now but will be more enviromentally friendly in the future and reap more benefits for all of our society. Not Concerned of Chilwell, Chilwell

	01-October-2002 Have they given up Concerned I feel it is important to be pragmatic about these issues. Yes I do want the tram and support it but I still think it is important to get the best system and insure that the best deal for traders and that best mitigation where required is provided. I also belive that is what bacit is about. But is it just a calm before more onslaught from the antis, Mr w and his 250k still has to be resolved and I undersatnd one of the other groups has said you have not seen anything yet, and the memebers of stop the tram still have to meet Mr Clarke. MF , chilwell

	01-October-2002 impressive lineup To AW, Thankyou for informing us that the NET team are an impressive line up, so are the English Football Squad, but at least I can put some faces and skills to some of the names of the latter. A skill I am sure a football pundit, which I am not, can readilly do . It would be reassuring and probalby benefical to their arguments, especially to the sceptics, if NET personalised themselves and gave more information to who they are and what skills they contribute to NET team, and what skills and expertise has to be contracted in e.g. for environmental monitoring the international company, ERM. Although I must agree with you that we do have the benefit of the experience of other tram systems operative in the country to draw upon, and once line 1 is up and running further lessons can be learnt and applied. What I do not understand is why the Chilwell-Beeston extension has to be to a P& R to which people first have to drive their cars too. Surely, it is better to terminate line 3 in the middle of the most dense housing area possible. For instance the housing built and to be build in and around the Ordnance depot surely in 4+ years this will exceed the 1000+ patronage percieved for the Bardill P& R. Are these people expected to drive to the P & R? After all, it is partonage the tram is after, the greater patronage the less the pollution, the less the congestion. Of course this may be a more expensive option (the Queens Road alternative) but then again why not pay off a bigger loan over more years or take it over the edge of the golf course and alogside Chilwell Comprensive (less school runs, kids couild use the tram)I would like to see line 3 have far more patronge and vairiety beyond Beeston than a P & R can offer, especially when it is at the expense of green belt, what happen! s ! when the P & R is full? Do we build a multistorey P&R. Lets take line 3 in to the heart of the Chilwell conurbation, to the new Tesco's past a major Comprensive School, to the shopping at the retail park, to the sproting amenieties at the Olympia. If I lived on the city side of Chilwell, surely I should be encouraged to use Line 3 in the other (Westward direction) A P & R is no use to me. The Nick Palmer route is offer far more attraction to the residents of Chilwell than a P & R at Bardills. PAS, Nottingham

	01-October-2002 Tram Stops Dear concerned of Chilwell, If you are resigned at getting the tram, then ask your county councillor R Jackson to help you find suitable sites for tram stops. He hasn't done anything useful since he was elected, so he might as well begin now. Not Concerned of Chilwell, Chilwell

	01-October-2002 we're getting it I just feel now that the attitude is we're getting the tram like it or not and so the antis can't be bothered - they've given up. I see BACIT are at least pushing for extra stops for us, one at Cator Lane which makes sense. If we've got to have it then let's at least have a useful service so much as it goes against the grain I shall probably end up asking for this stop - since the councillors and others locally are doing nothing. concerned, Chilwell