MORE than 100 cyclists are now pursuing compensation claims against Edinburgh City Council after being injured on the capital's tram lines, amid plans to extend the route.
Campaigners are urging city bosses not to repeat the design flaws of the current line if the trams are extended to Leith and Newhaven.
Prior to construction of the existing tram route, Dutch consultants commissioned to draw up a report on the scheme recommended that safety would be maximised if cyclists never had to cross the tram tracks at anything less than an 90-degree angle to reduce the risk of slipping, especially on rainy days. They also advised that accidents would be reduced if cyclists were segregated in bike lanes where they would be travelling in the opposite direction to the trams.
However, this was not followed through and is considered to be a major factor behind the high number of accidents.
Solicitor Stewart White, who is acting on behalf of more than 110 cyclists who have suffered broken bones, fractures and facial injuries as a results of falls on the tram lines, said: "These consultants came over from the Netherlands, they made a series of recommendations and they basically said 'if you can't do this safely it's better not to do it at all'.
"They recommended bi-directional cycle lanes and if you are making cyclists cross tram tracks, they should be crossing at a minimum 45-degree angle and ideally at a 90-degree angle.
"But the way it's been set up, in some cases, that's impossible for cyclists to do. The upshot is that we have a system that for cyclists is totally dysfunctional and it's dangerous as well."
Mr Stewart, of Thompson Solicitors, the legal firm which is handling the bulk of personal injury claims for cyclists injured on the tram lines, said that the compensation could range from hundreds of pounds to five-figure sums for the most serious cases.
Since the trams lines were first laid in 2009, there have been 260 recorded incidents of cyclists being injured.
That compares to just 16 over an 11 year period in Sheffield, where the 'Supertram' launched in 1994, and nine over an 11-year period in Croydon, which began operating its tramlink in 2000.
However, Mr Stewart believes that only around 40 per cent of accidents in Edinburgh are ever reported to the council, suggesting that the true toll could be well over 500.
Last week, councillors backed a motion recommending that, if extended, the tram route should encompass Leith and Newhaven, adding a further three miles to the line which currently runs between Edinburgh Airport and York Place in the city centre.
Ian Maxwell, spokesman for Lothian cycling campaigners, Spokes, said the organisation would be "broadly supportive" of more trams as long as the route was cycle-friendly.
"The experience in central Edinburgh at the moment is that the tram has caused more congestion and makes cycling less attractive," said Mr Maxwell.
"If you are running a tram down the middle of Leith Walk you're taking up quite a lot of space, so you have to counteract that - not by taking space away from pedestrians and cyclists - but by banning private cars."
Transport Convener, Councillor Lesley Hinds, said: “Cycle safety is of utmost importance to the Council and to this end we have gone to every effort to raise awareness of the impact of the tram on all road users, carrying out extensive awareness-raising activity both online and on-street. Like many other European cities Edinburgh now incorporates both cyclists and trams and, as in these cities, cyclists are advised to take care when travelling near the tram tracks.
“We will continue to demonstrate our commitment to cycling in Edinburgh, prioritising cycle safety, alongside any development in the city.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel