Re: [Melb] Yarra Trams - first move...

[Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com>]

I have heard a rumour (totally unconfirmed) that swanston trams want to
close the #16 Melb Uni - St Kilda tram entirely and let the 96 cover
fitzroy st and the other swanston st ones cover between St Kilda Junc.
and the Uni.

As I said, totally unconfirmed. Presumably otherwise, Swanston would
either truncate their Acland St line up at Luna Park as well, or
continue to run their trams down Acland St (which makes removing the #96
seem pointless, even if it were admitted that trams and pedestrians
don't mix)

Vaughan

In article <383525B3.3D8E298B@enternet.com.au>,
  Chris Brownbill <cbrnbill@enternet.com.au> wrote:
> Hmm - ungood.
>
> Interestingly this is one of those very rare sections of track over
which BOTH
> tram companies operate (Yarra No96 and Swanston No16).  So, what do
Swanston
> Trams say about this?
>
> Vaughan Williams wrote:
> >
> > The former.
> > Some idea to make acland street a pedestrian only cafe strip.
> > Pedestrianisation is great, but not if you remove trams which
integrate
> > well with pedestrians (eg.Bourke St Mall)
> >
> > In article <3833CB8F.2988D4B5@enternet.com.au>,
> >   Chris Brownbill <cbrnbill@enternet.com.au> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Vaughan Williams wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I don't think its a good idea at all for a number of reasons.
> > > >
> > > > /rant on
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Sixth point, the most stupid part of the plan is the removal of
the
> > > > tram from Acland St, St Kilda entirely.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > /rant off
> > > >
> > > > Vaughan
> > > >
> > >
> > > Are they really talking of removing trams from Acland Street - or
> > just removing
> > > the intermediate stop in Acland Street - between Luna Park and the
> > terminus?
> > >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.