Campaigners will “fight to maximise conditions for cycling” once controversial tram route plans finalised, but warn against “huge speculation”

Cycling campaigners in Edinburgh have promised to “fight to maximise conditions for cycling, and all forms of active travel” once plans for a controversial new tram route in the city have been announced by the council, but suggested it is better to wait for a proposal to be finalised rather than speculating amid an “information void”.

The latest discussion about the location of a proposed new tramline in Edinburgh, and whether it will be built on the city’s roads or, in part, alongside and potentially impacting an off-road cycling and walking route, comes after schoolchildren’s ‘save the bike path’ signs were vandalised. 

> Schoolchildren’s ‘save the bike path’ signs vandalised, after council ordered removal of artwork due to “sensitivities” surrounding controversial tram route plans

Edinburgh City Council had planned to remove the signage due to “sensitivities” surrounding the project, but by that time vandals had already damaged them, prompting the local authority to instead paint over the posters in black, a situation described as “disappointing”.

The route of a proposed new £2bn north-south tram line through the centre of the Scottish capital from Granton to the BioQuarter remains to be decided, the council expected to announce more details as part of a consultation later in the summer.

Some have accused the council of “being shortsighted and not thinking about the next generation”, speculating on the possibility that the Roseburn Path, a former railway line, which has established itself as a popular off-road active travel corridor in the city for cyclists, walkers, and wheelers, could be affected by the proposed tram route. 

Active travel campaign group Spokes, which has around 1,000 members, has made it clear its position is that the tram’s routing, on the road or via a disused railway, would have strong pros and cons for each option, the campaign wanting to see the council’s proposal first before “fighting to maximise conditions for cycling, and all forms of active travel in that option”. 

“At present there is a huge amount of speculation, and a huge lack of concrete detail, but we expect much more clarity and detail once the main consultation comes out this summer.  That will be the time for further debate and decisions,” a contact from Spokes told road.cc.

While some have suggested the tram should not come at the expense of a safe off-road cycling route, and should take the place of space for motor vehicles, others have pointed out that a route on the road could make things more dangerous for cyclists who use those routes, especially given Edinburgh’s long history of tramline-related casualties.

> Cyclists injured on Edinburgh tram line paid £1.2m in compensation

Ben Seven, author of local weekly digest edi.bike, says it has been “phenomenal” to see a “strong, grassroots campaign getting involved” (demonstrated by the signs calling to ‘Save Roseburn Path’) but agrees it makes more sense to wait for the council’s proposal.

“A tram line sharing a section of former railway bed on the Roseburn Path has been on the cards since an act of Parliament was passed in 2006,” he told us. “The notion has been divisive within the cycling community in Edinburgh, as while we clearly have a need in the city for the enormous public transport capacity light rail offers — particularly with a surge of development in the north prompted by the promise of a north-south tram line — folks are rightly worried about the impact on space for walking and cycling along the route, as well as biodiversity impacts and disruption during construction.

“What we see from campaign groups like Spokes and local cycling media, is not nailing their colours to the mast just yet, because the plans simply aren’t published. We can’t offer critique or shape the design through the consultation process until it starts — and until then — no amount of local expertise can really do more than guess at what’s being proposed. 

“While the report that came to our Transport & Environment Committee spoke about ‘discouraging’ cycling on the route — instead offering alternative segregated on-road provision — this didn’t ever make it through committee, and was the wording was removed by way of amendment. Officers were instead instructed to ensure that high-quality walking and cycling infrastructure was prioritised alongside the tramline, which will be separated by a parapet for safety — but we still hear folks claiming that cycling will be ‘discouraged’ in spite of that not reflecting the reality of the council’s process. 

“It’s phenomenal to see a strong, grassroots campaign getting involved, clearly driven in part by people’s changed relationships with local green space and its benefits during the Covid 19 pandemic. To us, it’s more interesting to wait and see what’s actually being proposed for the space — at the moment, the campaign is running against a sort of information void because the plans haven’t been revealed. What they have already achieved is to cause the council to review the possibility of other northbound options far more closely, which has delayed the consultation further — so public scrutiny is already getting the goods in that regard. 

“There’s still pressure on Spokes, and ourselves, to back the campaign — if you’re a cyclist using the path and feel it’s in danger, it’s a question of ‘why am I not being represented?’. I think it’s more important that organisations with a wide membership or readership just present what the possibilities are, and folks make their own minds up and respond to the consultation — but only once we see what’s actually being proposed when we get the plans.”

The main calls for the tram route to stick to roads has come from the Save the Roseburn Path who have opposed the off-road proposal.

> “Trams should replace cars, rather than people cycling”: Fears new tram route will be built on popular active travel path

Outlining their stance, they’ve said: “Our objective is clear: to stop the proposed tram extension going down the Roseburn Path. We want to protect the integrity of a key active travel corridor. The route is used by Edinburgh residents for walking, running, commuting, cycling, bench sitting and spending time in nature. It’s a slice of calm in our busy and often stressful lives.”

Earlier this month, the ‘Save the Roseburn Path’ group unveiled three signs designed and produced by P7 children at nearby Blackhall Primary School.

The signs, which were created during school lunchtimes, called for the council to “save the path”, while also juxtaposing the corridor’s current green space with what the schoolchildren view as the potential for a grey, litter-filled landscape caused by the tramline.

However, just days after they were first unveiled along the path, Edinburgh City Council called for the signs to be removed “immediately”, arguing that the debate around the future of the Roseburn Path is a “sensitive” one.

The local authority, however, has also claimed that the signs were vandalised before they could be removed, and were painted black to cover the offending graffiti (shortly after they were painted over, graffiti claiming “Covid was all a big lie” was spotted on the vandalised sign), before being returned to the school.

“I am aware that a group of children from a local primary school have created artwork which was displayed along the Roseburn Path,” James Dalgleish, the council’s education, children, and families convener told road.cc.

“Although I welcome pupils taking an interest in issues happening in their community, there are clearly sensitivities around this specific topic and how the opinions of pupils are expressed. The artwork was created outwith the class curriculum and during lunchtimes.”

Dalgleish continued: “Before council officers were able to securely remove the signage, the artwork was sadly vandalised. The signs have now been taken down and returned to the school.

“We understand that the damage to the artwork, which children spent time and effort to create, may cause upset and I am disappointed that this has happened.”

There will be more news on the project soon, the next stage of the tram project coming soon.

Council officers and consultants are being given “the space and the time to look at all the options on the table for Granton to BioQuarter” and the council has confirmed there will be a full 12-week consultation “which will then form the basis for a report to be considered by the Transport Committee probably in early 2026”.

The timing for the consultation has been agreed with council officers to avoid school holidays and promises to be as “robust as possible”.