New Tram Line, New Risks. Will Roseburn Path users be protected?

The Roseburn Path tram extension and growing public opposition.

The proposed tram extension along The Roseburn Path has become a focal point of public debate in Edinburgh.

With Councillors due to consider the outcome of a consultation next month that attracted over 11,000 responses, scrutiny of the scheme is intensifying.

Once a railway line, this path has become one of Edinburgh’s busiest off-road cycling, wheeling and walking routes since it’s 1980’s resurfacing, with around 600,000 trips a year – explaining the strong opposition to the proposals.

Supporters argue that the former railway line is well suited for a tram, causing less disruption than building on roads. Opponents, however, fear the loss of a unique space, and potential harm to local wildlife and habitats.

Safety concerns for cyclists and vulnerable road users.

From the standpoint of a personal injury solicitor acting for vulnerable road users, the principle issue is the potential impact on safety. Our experience involves representing cyclists injured in incidents involving tram infrastructure, particularly where wheels become trapped in rails or where loss of traction occurs. We also routinely act in claims arising from shared-use paths, where conflicts between different user groups are a recognised source of risk. The current proposals will synthesise tram and shared-use paths creating a new hybrid environment. Time will tell whether established hazards will evolve as a consequence.

Can segregated design adequately reduce risk?

It is notable that the design provides for physical segregation between the tram line and the walking, wheeling and cycling route along more than 90% of The Roseburn Path. The inclusion of a fence and buffer zone is a positive step and should mitigate the well-documented risks associated with direct interaction between cyclists and tram tracks.

Nevertheless, interaction cannot be eliminated entirely. Designated crossing points will be necessary, and their specification will be critical. Crossing must allow cyclists to traverse rails at appropriate angles, with sufficient width to accommodate varying speeds and volumes of use. Without careful design, such areas may give rise to foreseeable risks of collision or loss of control – issues that have featured prominently in previous claims.

If the proposals are approved, construction is not anticipated before 2028. Before works commence, one hopes there will be ample opportunity to address these concerns through detailed design and risk assessment. The consultation responses may prove instructive in identifying where public confidence in the scheme is weakest.

Balancing Transport Efficiency with Public Safety.

Having reviewed the proposals, I remain to be persuaded that the current design adequately resolves the competing demands of transport efficiency and user safety. The forthcoming Transport and Environment Committee discussions will therefore be of particular interest, not least in determining whether further safeguards can and should be incorporated.

Jo Clancy-Dodds