Would trams offer value for money?

The debate about the value and feasibility of trams, in Bath in particular, continues in the pages of the Bath Chronicle.

At the risk of boring Editor and readers, some additional points may be of interest.

There are no doubt technical experts among the proponents of trams, and I do not suggest they are not technically feasible, at a cost.

There are examples around the world, even if some of the installations would no longer meet modern standards (Lisbon perhaps?), or take advantage of more accessi

ble city layouts.

It would be interesting to know if there are cities which looked at trams and then decided the arguments did not stack up.

The proponents of trams make several claims which seem counter-intuitive, although evidence is said to exist.

For example, why should trams cause an increase in walking and cycling (rather than using the tram)?

What has happened to cars, buses and lorries, and what causes car drivers to switch to trams rather than buses, which can also have large capacity and high frequency?

Are trams really only electric buses that require increased capital cost to install the track and cabling, and are less flexible?

Is it practical to force goods deliveries to stop at the edge of town, be transferred to a tram, and then transferred again from tram to shop?

The feeling one gets on reading the various letters supporting trams is that they are a solution looking for a problem, with the implication that adding trams to an existing transport system will require the removal of other elements.

A tram network could be built in Bath providing employment, at some cost in capital and disruption, but will it be value for money for a council already having financial difficulties?

John Eddison Combe Down