http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: "Edinburgh faces £1m tram payout to injured cyclists" en Tue, 21 Apr 2026 04:52:14 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=4#post-309711 Sat, 29 Jun 2019 18:20:44 +0000 Tulyar 309711@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I refer to Chris Oliver's paper &amp; will post a more detailed sermon shortly.</p> <p>Over 20 years ago I was working with Pedals, HMRI (now ORR) and the NET promoter to deliver Nottingham trams with safer track 'profiles' drawing on the Tramways Act 1870, and a range of defined limits for road pavement irregularities - basically 6mm for high friction ridges, 3mm for low friction edges &amp; thermoplastic road markings.</p> <p>The Nottingham track, even after 20+ years still has a good transverse profile with the only 'slot' to deal with being the flangeway groove. This detail has also been delivered in Manchester (after a disasterous delivery of the first track, which had to be rebuilt after barely 10 years) Similar issues with Croydon and Sheffield, with the latter having to raise their game when Mr Roe claimed for his injuries after crashing his car, due, in part to the rails sticking up above the road surface by over 3mm - surprisingly this was not a detail used by the claimants as even when new there were ridges of 9-10 mm either side of the Edinburgh rails.</p> <p>Contemporary with Edinburgh, there was track being laid in Blackpool, and Manchester, and informal observations noted that Edinburgh's quality was a massive nadir when measured against the consistent quality delivered elsewhere. Manchester warrants special note, delivering a pavement finishing screed with high friction roadstone content, pressure cleaned at 24hr green strength, to deliver a pavement very precisely 2mm higher than the rails, and their rubber boot insulation. </p> <p>I'm grateful to @arellcat for assisting input from research on Scotland Street Tunnel, which highlighted the rubbish geology on which the tracks and carriageway have been built between Haymarket and St Andrew Street, and a strong suspicion that unlike Manchester, where the contracts provide for no track being built until the ground had a proven bearing strength (CBR 15) and other tests (Cohesion - Vane Test) included was provision for measured remedial work, where the ground was too weak.</p> <p>There is clear evidence that the underlying ground is sinking under the carriageway in several places, &amp; there is movement in the tram track slabs (cracks &amp; bits of concrete falling out, patches of tarmac, concrete etc - and some bits that you can rock around with your own weight). A section of Princes Street has sunk at least 6 inches, and there is another big hollow at the Manor Place junction where buses visibly bounce (can anyone get a good video?) </p> <p>Oh &amp; like Chris's results the matching Toronto study of cyclists falls also shows that over 50% were delivered when another road user's actions caused the cyclists to alter their approach to crossing the rails, often slowing down, which increases the risk of trapping the front tyre, or turning/braking as they crossed the rails which increases the risk of sliding. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=4#post-309679 Sat, 29 Jun 2019 09:41:08 +0000 chdot 309679@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/traffic-and-travel/cyclist-damages-claims-against-trams-could-cost-council-millions-warn-experts-1-4956325" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/traffic-and-travel/cyclist-damages-claims-against-trams-could-cost-council-millions-warn-experts-1-4956325</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309654 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:24:28 +0000 Arellcat 309654@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>It sounds like the council were trying the playground defence (It wasn't me).</em></p> <p>My school's unofficial motto at the time was "Wisnae me".</p> <p><em>separating cyclists and motor vehicles by time (without delaying cyclists) would also allow cyclists to cross the tracks at the correct angle.</em></p> <p>That assumes cyclists are able to reach the safe place on the road from which to begin crossing during a protected phase. Call it an 'advanced crossing reservoir' or something, but drivists have a remarkably poor sense of spacial perception at the best of times. You would need the physically separated route plus a stop line plus a suitable light phase (Liberton/Blackford/Mayfield/Kirk Brae is not a suitable precedent).</p> <p>I think removing motor traffic would go a long way towards ameliorating the hazard. Can Toronto provide a way forward? Lots of on-road trams there, mingling with drivers and bicyclists. I thought the drivers were a lot more polite than here, when I visited. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309647 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:31:53 +0000 acsimpson 309647@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The correct solution at Haymarket unfortunately requires the tracks to be moved. However separating cyclists and motor vehicles by time (without delaying cyclists) would also allow cyclists to cross the tracks at the correct angle.</p> <p>Even if they create parallel routes for cyclists to enjoy without a legally enforceable ban on cycling at dangerous locations they still leave themselves liable. I can't see for instance how they can make a safe crossing angle at the bottom of the mound without removing motor traffic, not think of a suitable alternative route. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309632 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:15:53 +0000 crowriver 309632@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>You can't make the tracks safe. There's always an inherent risk, as the case highlighted they were unsafe "in the 1950s" too. What you can do is to remove cycling infrastructure/routes from intersecting with them, which is what I imagine will happen. Another option is to remove ,motor vehicles from interacting with them, and thus make the tracks safer for cyclists. I can't see that happening. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309629 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:05:48 +0000 acsimpson 309629@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It sounds like the council were trying the playground defence (It wasn't me). I suppose they knew they didn't have a leg to stand but needed something to put in their defence.</p> <p>Is it possible that their costs are being met by insurance? If so they may not have been allowed to admit liability.</p> <p>Let's hope they now get their act together and make the tracks safe before anyone else gets hurt. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309627 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:47:53 +0000 Stickman 309627@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Full judgement here:</p> <p><a href="https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=649c69a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7" rel="nofollow">https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=649c69a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309626 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:42:54 +0000 Stickman 309626@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>What a waste of our money and their time and health.</em></p> <p>And, so far, one life. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309625 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:40:37 +0000 I were right about that saddle 309625@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>The council had maintained that it fulfilled all duties of reasonable care.</em></p> <p>What a grim claim to make. It's infuriating that everyone told them this was inevitable. Really infuriating. What a waste of our money and their time and health. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-309618 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:56:18 +0000 Stickman 309618@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/traffic-and-travel/two-cyclists-win-damages-claims-against-edinburgh-trams-1-4956116/amp" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/traffic-and-travel/two-cyclists-win-damages-claims-against-edinburgh-trams-1-4956116/amp</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-243070 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:30:23 +0000 Stickman 243070@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/opinion/leader-comment-cyclists-are-cyclists-the-whole-country-over-1-4367753" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/opinion/leader-comment-cyclists-are-cyclists-the-whole-country-over-1-4367753</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-243042 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:38:55 +0000 Arellcat 243042@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Thought experiment:</p> <p>If all motor vehicles were removed—cars, taxis, buses, HGVs, motorbikes—so that only bicycles and trams were left, how many tram rail-bike accidents would occur? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-243036 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:43:41 +0000 jonty 243036@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Common sense would also dictate that you don't swerve out in front of a taxi to avoid crossing at a shallow angle, but the old Haymarket road layout often forced you to make the choice.</p> <p>(Now the swerving is done with the assistance of red paint.)</p> <p>The key aspect here is negligence - CEC were repeatedly warned the tram plans would present avoidable hazards to cyclists. Common sense would dictate they change the plans to, er, avoid them. To save money, they didn't. If there's no risk of getting sued, there's nothing to stop them (literally) throwing cyclists under a bus to save money again. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-243034 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:36:09 +0000 zesty 243034@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>cyclist was required or encouraged to cross the tram track at a shallow angle</em></p> <p>Surely common sense would dictate that there is a change of your tyre getting caught if crossing at a shallow angle.</p> <p>Common sense has to prevail at some point.... or maybe not in this "got to sue someone" era. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-242949 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 14:16:09 +0000 Ed1 242949@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What I wonder is does the picture at the top of article show someone cycling someone between tram and bus is this about creating a subconscious perception of cyclists careless interactions with trams </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-242948 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 14:02:15 +0000 Stickman 242948@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Frenchy - genuine LOL at that one. The use of caps lock made it even better. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-242946 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 13:57:00 +0000 Frenchy 242946@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Don't bother reading the comments. The same tired old guff by the same tired old crowd. </em></p> <p>That's unfair. Someone getting annoyed at the EEN because their browser's dictionary is American English was novel. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-242945 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 13:52:58 +0000 threefromleith 242945@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Don't bother reading the comments. The same tired old guff by the same tired old crowd. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-242893 Wed, 15 Feb 2017 18:21:56 +0000 chdot 242893@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/edinburgh-has-more-bike-tram-accidents-than-any-other-city-1-4367394" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/edinburgh-has-more-bike-tram-accidents-than-any-other-city-1-4367394</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96829 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:07:12 +0000 fimm 96829@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@SRD "just the safe part"</p> <p>I quite like that, but then the "safe part" of the road is the bit that is free from thoughtless or careless road users, particularly those in charge of large lumps of metal. Maybe "no, just enough for my safety" (like whoever it is with "yes, my child's safely is more important than 20 seconds of your time"). But then you are back to "well get a car if you think being on a bike is dangerous", and by the time you've started to answer that the lights have changed... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96802 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:22:07 +0000 chdot 96802@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"only thinking of a better reply when it is far too late"</p> <p>I think your response was perfect - in a tram line situation. </p> <p>I presume you haven't crossed the tram tracks before. </p> <p>You <em>need</em> the whole of the road to work out the optimum line - and you probably won't find that the first time. </p> <p>ALSO it seems the the surfaces around the rails are less than constant/reliable so 'optimum' may change - even when it's dry... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96800 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:16:53 +0000 SRD 96800@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@fimm how about 'no, just the safe part' </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96798 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:14:44 +0000 fimm 96798@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@chdot; in the usual manner of only thinking of a better reply when it is far too late, I think I should have said<br /> "no, just 3 feet of it"...</p> <p>@kaputnik; that's the effect I was trying to achieve... clearly I failed... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96788 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:51:15 +0000 kaputnik 96788@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>My only real interaction witht he tram tracks is at the bottom of the Mound. I find myself making rather grand and overblown maneouvres to take the tracks at a far more optimal angle than the cooncil's paint department see fit. It is my way of saying "I AM TAKING THESE IN A MANNER THAT I DEEM FIT. I AM CLEARLY A RAVING LUNATIC FOR CYCLING. KEEP BACK. I BITE" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96778 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:14:43 +0000 chdot 96778@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"That'll be a learning curve for everyone!"</p> <p>I think they might need people with red flags for the first few weeks... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96777 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:12:59 +0000 chdot 96777@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I don't think that's the answer he was expecting"</p> <p>Classic!</p> <p>"drivers will just have to get used to it, and cyclists develop a thick skin..."</p> <p>The first bit might not happen until trams actually start running on-road. </p> <p>That'll be a learning curve for everyone! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96774 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:02:47 +0000 fimm 96774@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I took my bike (Brompton) along Princess Street on Saturday and lived to tell the tale. Actually it seemed quite quiet even though it was late Saturday afternoon, hmmm. </p> <p>I did, however, have to cross the new tracks on Shandwick Place to get to and from Manor Place. So I slowed right down and took them nice and slowly, as advised. On my way back, there was a car behind me, so I gestured to the lines to explain why I was going so carefully. Driver didn't seem to get it, though. We proceeded to the red light and he wound the window down:</p> <p>"Do you want the whole road?" he asked.<br /> "Yes, please," I replied.</p> <p>I don't think that's the answer he was expecting, even when I tried to explain about the tram tracks... oh well, drivers will just have to get used to it, and cyclists develop a thick skin... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-96756 Sun, 13 Jan 2013 20:14:09 +0000 Tulyar 96756@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Arellcat has taken some more pictures, and I have made a nocturnal visit between trains, given that I had to change trains in Edinburgh and there were 2 more departures before the last one. </p> <p>@Arellcat's near fall was on the short section of green surfaced road in which the tram track sits. It has a 'slot' along the edge of the green surfacing where the joint with the uncoloured surface occurs. That slot is about 25m wide (mental note use a £2 coin (30mm) for daylight photo)and deep enough to affect cycle control.</p> <p>But further along - in worrying places where traffic is crossing and turning, the poured polymer seal that connects the track system to the road surface has started to come out, with a serious chunk sticking up/out where the Mound meets Princes Street, and at the stop line by the National Gallery the tarmac is also crumbling. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-93014 Sat, 01 Dec 2012 02:10:06 +0000 kaputnik 93014@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>whoops, double post </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8970&page=3#post-93010 Sat, 01 Dec 2012 02:00:28 +0000 kaputnik 93010@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>as Fimm says, if you ride an S-shape route across both rails, you can pass them at a more optimal angle. It#s far from ideal, but certainly safer. Depends of course on compliance of following traffic, as you have to move left to begin the S, they might take it that there's room for them to pass, just as you swing right infront of them. Maybe hand signals required too. </p>