Part of a report to spokes, detailing injuries from a fairly recent tramline crash 12. Please tell us about severity of injuries as a consequence of the crash * I was in hospital overnight or longer I went to A&E, outpatients or some other medical centre, but not overnight I had some quite nasty injuries but did not go to a medical centre I had fairly minor injuries and did not go to a medical centre I had no physical injuries 12a. Did your injuries prevent you cycling for a while (this is about your injuries, not your confidence - we will ask about confidence later) * I was physically able to cycle again at once or within a day I could not cycle for a few days due to injury I could not cycle for a few weeks due to injury I could not cycle for months due to injury I will never be able to cycle independently again It's still early days, but I may be unable to cycle for weeks, months or longer 12b. If you wish to say more about injuries, please do so here I broke both ulna and radius and damaged ulna nerve.
bluesky post by someone concerned about the road surface next to the tramlines, with picture showing broken surface Helen Back @helenback1.bsky.social @edinburghcouncil.bsky.social @livingstreetsedi.bsky.social @stephenjenkinson.bsky.social @sw20.info Cycling along Princes St is dangerous for lots of reasons but the road surface where it meets tram lines is now the worst ever. It can’t remain like this *any longer* or someone will die under a bus
Spokes info sheet on how to minimise your risks... Spokes information sheet, last updated Nov 2025 TRAMLINE BIKE-CRASH DANGERS, AND HOW TO MINIMISE THE RISKS Spokes has received many reports of crashes on Edinburgh’s tramlines, some with serious injury. Based on this, and other sources, we here make suggestions for reducing your chances of becoming another victim. If you have had a tramline crash (recently or in the past) please complete our survey, which provides us with useful information about the nature and causes of tramline crashes. We also suggest where and how to report your crash formally – and to get legal advice if necessary. Here ... www.spokes.org.uk/documents/public-transport/tram. How to Minimise the Likelihood of a Tramline Crash (a) approach the tramline as close to 90 degrees as possible – unfortunately the tramline layout is such that anything near to 90 degrees is impossible in many places (b) it is often said that an angle of 60 degrees or more is pretty safe from the trapping hazard – but skidding is still a serious risk, especially if wet. Angles below 45 degrees are increasingly risky for both hazards (c) cross the tramlines in a straight line, not cornering. When cornering, the bike is leaning slightly, which makes skidding more likely (d) avoid braking when crossing tramlines – this can make skidding more likely (e) do not slow down to cross tramlines, and do keep a sensitive but firm grip on your handlebars. This should help your wheel to roll over the tramline groove with less chance of being deflected into it (f) as far as possible (and it is often not possible) keep a good distance from motor vehicles, especially behind you. Traffic pressures make crashes more likely, for example affecting your crossing angle (g) cycling between tramlines can provide a relatively traffic-free route, but we don’t advise it because it requires two tramline crossings at dodgy angles - and we know of crashes that have resulted (h) be very aware that many o…
#tramlines #injuries
☹️ Attached, recent #PrincesStreet crash report
Due to broken surface, like @helenback1.bsky.social post
Case now with #CycleLaw
🙋 Spokes crash info-> www.spokes.org.uk/documents/pu...
@edi.bike @finlaymcf.bsky.social @cllrcmiller.bsky.social @edfoc.bsky.social @pedals.org.uk
![A suggested low cost scheme for George Street, possibly as an interim solution for several years until funding becomes available for a full scheme.
Following the visitor levy decision we are unclear if the existing proposals can still be funded. However, if they are not going ahead – or not in the relatively near future – then we urge that low cost changes are made as rapidly as possible to complete CCWEL, including connections at Charlotte and St Andrew Squares, and to improve pedestrian conditions. We suggest two alternatives, even if they are only interim solutions for a number of years.
3a [our strong preference]
Remove central parking, and reduce traffic lanes from 4 to 2, with wider footways and unidirectional kerb-protected cycle lanes on both sides
This type of approach was in fact accepted to be a feasible low-cost option by transport officers in a TEC debate a few years ago, when concern was growing about escalating project costs, but was rejected in favour of developing the more comprehensive, but costly, current scheme.
It also has the advantage of preserving symmetry, a major concern for heritage groups.
Under an initial or temporary low cost, scheme, the central setts etc could be retained and the space repurposed, for example seating and planters with trees. The proposal would ideally also be accompanied by restrictions on moving traffic, for example allowing only taxis, buses and necessary deliveries, although this could be a later stage so as to aid early implementation. The removal of central area parking would in any case substantially reduce private motor traffic.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:2ood4k4wojq5jku2zl3myqco/bafkreibh7mc7gww73zv73qy4srxopktw7kjxjer6tarviv7kug6w5sh7ua)
![Huge amounts of precious time having to be spent by officers in reassuring & re-reassuring worried councillors on issues where evidence is already pretty solid...
In conclusion, a random thought
Looking back on the stories above, one has to be struck by the huge amount of precious officer time that is devoted to handling the concerns of councillors worried by objections which in the end often prove either irrelevant or largely unfounded. Time which could be spent far more productively. Here are some examples…
There is no better example than the saga of the Travelling Safely experimental Orders and the role of the TRO subcommittee (see ‘2025’ near the start of this article), resulting in additional meetings and literally hundreds of pages of reports [e.g. this 682-page download for their third meeting covering much of the same ground]
The Braid Estate story (see above) is another – huge amounts of time in meetings, massive reports, preparation of traffic orders, finding contractors, abortive costs – all in aid of a messy compromise experiment, unwanted by many, and which may now not happen
Most recently, the decision of TRO Sub to postpone a decision on whether to allow east-bound cycling in Rose Street, where westbound has been legal for decades. Officers now have to prepare a report on issues such as whether bikes may collide with cafe tables or get through any roadworks that might happen, even though the existing west-bound cycling works perfectly well.
Is there a solution to this tragic time-wasting, delaying projects which are far more safety and environmentally significant? Certainly, objections must be heard, and councillors must interrogate officers. Some objections do have real substance. But when evidence is clear, and plainly laid out by officers when questioned at Committee (as, largely, in the above examples) surely there must be a mechanism for making councillors think twice. Is yet another investigation, more reports, more meetings, mor…](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:2ood4k4wojq5jku2zl3myqco/bafkreigm4aqkvdzwcswswz2vo5x3ao7darvfnglbc72ymh7jldoeddezza)
