Re: Stored trams at Newport

Daniel Bowen (dbowen@custard.net.#SPAMTRAP#.au)
Tue, 10 Feb 1998 22:52:09 GMT

Dave McL <davemcl@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
>This 2015 "accessible" law looks like a fast way to shut the tramway
>system. Not a single tram is accessible, thanks to the morons who
>declined to produce the B2s as accessible. By 2015, only the Z1s will be
>due for replacement. What's the betting on an order for 1000 buses in
>2010?

What exactly is this law? Is it Federal or State? And is it only trams in
Melbourne that are targetted? I don't quite see why only trams, and not buses
should have to accessible. (Especially since buses cover many more areas.)

Don't get me wrong, I think accessible trams would be a terrific idea. It's a
crying shame that the Zs, As and Bs weren't made accessible. It would save me a
heap of hassle every time I take my toddler out in his pram. But it seems a
little odd to now say "well, the trams ALL have to be accessible" if you're not
also saying that all buses have to be accessible as well.

Also keep in mind that Melbourne, as far as I can make out, is one of the few
cities in the world that has an entirely accessible suburban train system.
London doesn't, it looks like New York doesn't, and judging from a Sydney map of
a few years ago, Sydney doesn't either. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on
this).

Daniel

--
Daniel Bowen, Melbourne Australia.
Remove the spam bait to email me personally...