It took the best part of four years but the Broadway to Brunton Lane cycle lanes and new pedestrian crossings have now been completed.

In December 2015, responding to the Council’s initial consultation, we said “Currently this is a busy dual carriageway with frequent busses and fast-moving traffic: it is hard for pedestrians to cross and is largely unsuited to all but the bravest of cyclists.”

Now crossing is easier and local residents can cycle safely in relative comfort along this stretch of road, and it is now one of the few places in Newcastle where it is possible to cycle safely along a main road. The route has even won an award for being the CIHT North East & Cumbria Sustainability Project of The Year. It is undoubtedly a significant step forward in creating a Safe Pedestrian And Cycling Environment for Gosforth.

In the current COVID-19 pandemic, it also allows people to use a cycle to exercise or go to local shops, and the cycle lane can also be used by people walking if they need to pass others while keeping 2m distance. The Government is suggesting workers should walk or cycle more as restrictions start to be eased so it will help that as well.

That said, we should always look to see where the design could have been better or more consistent so it can be improved on in future plans. If the Council wants Newcastle to be “one of the easiest, greenest and safest cities to get around” it still has a way to go to beat the likes of Amsterdam or Copenhagen, but this is definitely a step in the right direction.

We have included some examples at the end of the blog to show how streets have been laid out in similar locations in the Netherlands.

Route Review – North Bound

The new route starts at Broadway Roundabout connecting to the previously installed Regent Centre to Broadway Roundabout cycle lanes.  That previous scheme has people walking and cycling sharing the same space by the roundabout but that ends at the start of the new route, marked with a bollard.

N1 Transition from Broadway Roundabout

For the first part of the cycle lane, the Council have used bolt-down kerbs keeping the cycle lane at road level. The picture below shows the cycle lane still uses less space than the pavement or either of the two road lanes, and possibly also less than the central median.

We understand the original plan was to have the route at pavement height but this approach was adopted to avoid complications with having to reroute utilities under the road.

The bolt-down kerbs don’t provide a lot of separation from traffic but are relatively comfortable and a good bit better than the Orcas used further south. Bolt-down kerbs are also a cheap and quick way of introducing cycle routes. In our response to Newcastle City Council’s Call for Evidence on Climate Change we recommended bolt-down kerbs as one of our “Quick Wins” to  enable people to cycle safely within the city.

N2 By the City of Newcastle Golf Club

At the next junction, green tarmac is used to show the cycle lane continues across the entrance to the golf club, so traffic into or out of the club has to wait for people cycling along the main road to pass. The end of the bolt-down kerbs is marked by a black and white ‘wand’ and stops relatively close to the entrance so vehicles don’t encroach into the cycle lane and have to slow before turning.

N3 Green tarmac crossing the Golf Club entrance

A new crossing has been installed by the Three-Mile footbridge, This was proposed to help people cross who couldn’t use the footbridge and was subject to a separate consultation.

Although some people think footbridges are safer, there is a body of evidence that suggests the opposite because they encourage drivers to go faster, which means that when collisions do happen they are more serious. See for example this article from the Institute of Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP):  Pedestrian Bridges Make Cities Less Walkable. Why Do Cities Keep Building Them?

N4 Pedestrian crossing and footbridge by the Three Mile Inn

As the cycle lane is part of the road, people cycling northbound are expected to stop when the pedestrian crossing traffic lights turn red.

At the bus stop next to the bridge, the cycle lane temporarily goes back up to pavement height and passes in front of the bus shelter. The bus shelter was previously blocking the pavement, but has now been moved so people can walk past.

Usually there would be a separate space for people waiting for buses to stand next to the road (on the right of the cycle lane in the picture below) and this was the initial plan before the Council decided to retain the footbridge. Not having this extra space means there is a greater chance of conflict between people cycling and people getting on or off the bus.

N5 Bus stop opposite the Three Mile Inn

In the picture above you can also see a motorway-style crash barrier after the bus stop. This is to stop motor vehicles mounting the pavement and damaging the bridge and isn’t anything to do with the cycle lane.

At the entrance to Bridge Park, the same green tarmac has been used to show the cycle lane has priority over the side road. This is consistent along the length of the route, although in some cases the give way lines also give priority to pedestrians crossing the side road, but not here for some reason.

N6 Entrance to Bridge Park

Unlike the green tarmac, the way the double-yellow lines have been drawn does seem to vary between junctions. In the picture above, for example, the lines on the main road and on the corner are separate but in the picture below on the far side of the crossing the lines are continuous. This is more a curiosity though than an issue with the cycle lane.

We’re also unsure why there is only a single dashed line across the exit to the petrol station rather than a double line, which you would expect to show vehicles should give way.

N7 Petrol station exit

After the petrol station the route transitions up to pavement level and stays that way until Polwarth Drive roundabout. Rather than being separated by a kerb, the Council has used a raised white line to mark the boundary between the footway and cycle lane. This is fairly common, partly because it is easy to install, and no doubt also because it is cheaper than installing separate paths or kerb-separation. It also compensates to some extent for narrower cycle lanes or pavements as people cycling can use the footway to overtake and vice-versa.

N8 Cycle lane next to Greystoke Park

At Greystoke Park, there used to be a slip road that allowed traffic to exit the Great North Road without slowing. This has been replaced as retaining it would have created unnecessary risks for people crossing the road on foot or cycling.

When vehicles turn into Greystoke Park now they need to slow down in advance of turning and, if someone is crossing the road, there is space to wait off the Great North Road. Unlike at Bridge Park, the give way lines on exiting Greystoke Park also give priority to people crossing the road on foot. A raised crossing also helps to slow vehicles and means that people crossing can do so at the same level.

N9 Entrance to Greystoke Park

At Fencer Hill Park (picture below), there isn’t space for the cycle path to bend away from the road so it continues in a straight line across the junction. Perhaps for future schemes the Council might consider making the footway and cycle path fully continuous across junctions as in the Dutch example at the end of this blog.

New tactile paving has been installed at this crossing as well as on other side road crossings along this route. This helps people with a visual impairment know that they are about to cross a road. 

Designing for people with a visual impairment is important for any community, but is especially so for Gosforth as the city’s Visual Impairment Additionally Resourced Centre is based at Gosforth Academy.

N10 Entrance to Fencer Hill Park

Just before the Polwarth Drive roundabout, the pavement and cycle lane bend away from the road to create additional spaces for residents to park their cars next to the road.

N11 The approach to Polwarth Drive roundabout

At the crossing there is a give-way and slow sign for people heading north. We aren’t sure why priority has been given to people crossing rather than those travelling north. This is the equivalent situation to if a side road had been given priority over The Great North Road, and traffic travelling along the main road had to slow and give way to cars exiting the side roads. Again, it is unlikely to prove a major issue.

N12 Approaching the pedestrian and cycle crossing

This crossing is the only one on the route where there are separate walking and cycling paths. All the others have shared paths for people walking and cycling. Tactile paving is used to mark the edge of the cycle lane as well as the edge of the road.

N13 Pedestrian and cycle crossing

Between the crossing and Polwarth Drive the cycle track is two-way to create a direct two-way route between Brunton Park and McCracken Close. If this wasn’t two way, people from Brunton Park would have to cycle north to the next set of lights past the entrance to Melton Park, crossing there then returning south to McCracken Close.

At the bus stop, there is plenty of space for people to alight from or wait for their bus well away from the cycle lane.

N14 Bus stop next to Polwarth Drive

The crossing at Polwarth is similar to the crossings on Broadway East and West but with a few differences. The first is that the only marked route is straight on across the crossing, whereas at Broadway roundabout it is possible to turn left without crossing the main road.

N15 Crossing Polwarth Drive

The second difference is that the crossing is not as wide as at Broadway which, along with the tighter turns on entry, does make the crossing a little more comfortable especially for people on foot. If there had been one exit lane to the roundabout, as was originally proposed, it might have been possible to make this narrower still or have a central island for people crossing on foot.

The Council revised this plan, to create two vehicle lanes exiting Brunton Park at the request of some Brunton Park residents following a meeting about trees and the stone bus shelters. As we said in our analysis of the proposed (Horrible) Haddricks Mill junction, according to the US Department of Transportation, “flaring the entry width from one to two lanes is likely to increase injury crashes by 25 percent”.

N16 Crossing Polwarth Drive

The design for the entry to the Great North Road service road was also revised. Vehicles can still enter but the entrance has been narrowed and a gentle speed hump added to discourage higher driving speeds.

N17 The Great North Road service road entrance

The rest of the route up to Brunton Lane is on the service road, which has very little traffic. The only changes on this section are the addition of painted cycle signs on the road and the priority at the entrance to Norwood Avenue has been changed so vehicles entering from Norwood Avenue have to slow down and give way.

At the very north end of the route is Gosforth’s original ‘bus stop bypass’ only rather than being bypassed by just a cycle lane it has a whole road going behind it.

N21 Bus stop bypass by Brunton Lane

The crossing you can just see on the right in the above photo was also due to be updated as part of the scheme to remove the large dog-leg in the middle. This, we understand, is due to be included in a future scheme connecting Brunton Lane with Gosforth Park and Wideopen.

Route Review – South Bound

S1 Bus stop opposite Brunton Lane

Starting again at the north end of the route going south, the first thing you would come across is a new bus stop bypass where the cycle lane passes behind the bus stop. This shelter has glass walls to give some protection from the wind but also to allow people at the bus stop to see oncoming buses and people cycling. There is also tactile paving to show guide people with a visual impairment where to cross the cycle lane.

S2 Showing tactile paving to cross the cycle lane

South of the bus stop the Council have planted somewhere between twenty five and thirty new trees on the grass verge and in the central reservation, replacing removed trees by a factor of about 5:1. These were added as part of the cycle scheme. Details of the tree removal and re-planting can be found here.

S3 Newly planted trees next to the cycle lane

At the next bus stop the cycle lane goes in front of the bus shelter.

S4 The cycle path passes in front of the stone bus shelter

This is a fairly common arrangement in the Netherlands at locations where space is limited. The picture below shows a bus stop from Haarlem. The main difference between the two locations is that people waiting at the Harleem bus stop can see much more clearly what is coming. They can also sit down while waiting.

Bus stop and cycle lane in Haarlem, Netherlands

Both at Haarlem and on the Great North Road there is tactile paving to show where to cross the cycle lane.

This design, has mitigated some of the concerns we raised about retaining the Stone bus shelters.

S5 Stone bus shelter and tactile paving

Where the cycle route meets the crossing just north of Newlands Avenue the route briefly becomes a shared space for walking and cycling. We think a design more like the parallel crossing south of Polwarth Drive, with a continuous cycle lane and separate tactile to cross the cycle lane and the road, would have made more sense at this location for people walking and cycling but it isn’t a big issue.

S6 New toucan crossing just north of Newlands Avenue

Between the crossing and Newlands Avenue the route briefly becomes two-way to make it easier for people exiting Newlands Avenue wanting to travel north, rather than having to travel to the crossing south of Polwarth Drive and back again.

S7 Approaching Newlands Avenue

At Newlands Avenue, the side road has priority over people travelling along the main road. There doesn’t appear to be any rational reason for this road to be different from all of the other side road junctions along the route. The main effect will be that people who are comfortable cycling in the bus lane will be encouraged to continue to do so. If Newlands Avenue is really that busy the Council might consider a zebra crossing for people walking north-south.

By the roundabout, the path has been widened and the railings have been removed. While railings have been used widely across the country in the past, evidence now suggests they have no real benefit for safety. Transport for London, in its Streetscape Guidance, says “there is no conclusive evidence that the inclusion of PGR [Pedestrian Guard Railings] at any type of pedestrian crossing or junction has any statistically significant effect on the safety record“.

S8 Opposite Polwarth Drive

At the crossing south of the roundabout, the layout is similar to the other side. It does look from the picture below that the tactile paving on the left of the cycle path has been missed. We have informed the Council.

S9 Pedestrian and cycle crossing next to McCracken Close

At McCracken Close priority is again given to people walking and cycling along the main road so vehicles exiting from the side road have to give way.

S10 McCracken Close

After McCracken Close, the cycle path becomes separate from the pavement and, as it is slightly higher than the road, fencing has been installed. Part of the reason for the height difference is that tarmac was laid above the existing ground level rather than digging down to avoid damage to tree routes.

We have had feedback from SPACE for Gosforth members that the end of this section where it drops down again to pavement level can be slippy if there is ice or lots of leaves. We have provided feedback separately to the Council about the (lack of) maintenance for walking and cycling paths in winter, which we are told is not currently possible due to budget pressures.

S11 Raised cycle lane south of McCracken Close

At the entrance to Fencer Court, the paths join up again.

S12 Entrance to Fencer Court

This is followed by a long section with no crossings or driveways. The bollard, one of many along the route, shows that one side should be for walking and one for cycling. In the Dutch example at the top of this blog, bollards like this are not needed because the cycle path is clearly marked in a different colour tarmac. The Dutch approach means less street clutter and fewer hard objects that people might crash into.

S13 South of Fencer Court

At the bridge over the Ouseburn the motorway-style barrier has been retained, just like on the other side of the road, to protect the bridge from damage from motor vehicles.

S14 Crossing the Ouseburn

At the crossing by the Three Mile Inn, people cycling can continue without having to stop for the lights. For people on foot, crossing the cycle lane is more akin to crossing one of the many side roads on the route, and probably safer, so lights are not required.

S15 Toucan crossing next to Three Mile Inn

The design of the south-bound bus stop by the Three Mile Inn (below) is much closer to the example we shared from Haarlem above, with the shelter providing shelter and somewhere to sit as well as good visibility north to see oncoming buses and bicycles.

S16 Bus stop south of the Three Mile Inn

Near the end of the route by Broadway roundabout, the cycle track is no longer level and instead drops to road level by each driveway and then back up to pavement level in between. This may cause issues for people cycling who have a disability or are carrying children or heavy luggage. We discuss this issue in our blog Inclusive Cycling – the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. It also makes for quite an uncomfortable experience for anyone travelling at a reasonable speed.

From the picture you can see that this is just replicating the existing line of the pavement. We did ask that the pavement be made level and the cycle path along with it, but were told that the Council have to design to government standards which require a shallow gradient for cars exiting driveways, and that this take priority over people walking, cycling, pushing buggies or people in wheelchairs, all of whom will be affected by this. The Conservative Government did promise in its 2019 election manifesto that they would soon publish new design standards for cycling so we hope this will be resolved as part of the new standards although at the time this blog was published these standards had still not been released.

Newcastle City Council isn’t the only local authority to do this. For example there is quite an extreme example of this in Cheshire that looks even more like a BMX track than a pavement and cycle lane.

S17 Approaching the Broadway Roundabout

The car in the distance on the picture above is a local resident who has pulled briefly onto the cycle lane out of the way of moving traffic before reversing into their drive. This means when they are exiting their drive they are facing forward and can see oncoming traffic as well as people walking and cycling.

There are issues with vehicles being parked on the pavement and cycle lane along this section of the Great North Road but this was not one of them.

Rather disappointingly, the final short section of the route is at road level and becomes an advisory cycle lane only separated from the main carriageway by a painted line. Because of the lack of separation, some people cycling might choose to use the pavement for a short distance.

A better solution would have been to install bolt-down kerbs like on the north-bound lane. Installing bolt-down kerbs along this section would also have allowed the route to stay level with the carriageway rather than going up and down. The vehicle lanes at this point are still quite wide, and might even benefit from being narrowed to reduce speeds in the approach to the roundabout, so there is space to do this.

S18 Approaching the Broadway Roundabout

Research into child cycling has shown that parents quite reasonably do not regard paint-separated lanes to be suitable for child cycling and our experience in Gosforth is that cars regularly encroach on painted cycle lanes.  As this stretch is likely to be used by school children, we hope the Council will fix this and provide safe onward connectivity to local schools including Broadway East and Gosforth Park First Schools, Gosforth East Middle School and St. Oswald’s RC Primary School.

A car encroaches in the cycle lane at Regent Centre traffic lights

Overall, as we said at the start, this is definitely a step in the right direction. Prior to this route being installed, cycling along this section of road felt very dangerous, and the extra crossings will help people walking local journeys. Even just using this a few times it is obvious there are more people out cycling than there were previously, including unaccompanied older children.

The key lessons we think for the Council in planning future main-road routes are:

1. Ensuring designs are inclusive, so that they enable a wider range of people to cycle, including people with disabilities, parents with children and existing cyclists. That includes ensuring sufficient width so a parent and child can cycle together.
2. Setting standards for cycle lanes e.g. green tarmac, so that the number of bollards can be minimised, and a design speed. Government guidance suggests that cycle lanes should be designed to allow someone cycling to do so at 20mph even if the average speed is more likely to be closer to 12mph.
3. Coming up with a design for continuous pavement and cycle lanes across side roads, much like in the Dutch examples, to maintain main-road priority. People cycling shouldn’t have to slow down at side junctions any more than someone who is driving a car along a main road.
4. Making sure pavements and cycle lanes stay at a level rather than going up and down at driveways.
5. Implementing at pace. If this had been implemented immediately after the original consultation we would have benefited from the new cycle lane and crossings for three additional years at no extra cost.

The Council also, more recently, mentions its investment in cycling as a way of combatting Climate Change.  We don’t think this scheme will make much difference to carbon emissions because it has not included any changes that would reduce or slow traffic along the Great North Road. At the time of the consultation this was presented as a good thing, however if the Council is now serious in addressing Climate Change and removing vehicle lanes might be possible, the extra space freed up would almost certainly make it easier to design a high quality route.

For comparison, here is an explanation of how a typical main road / minor road junction works in the Netherlands, taken from the BicycleDutch blog A common urban intersection in the Netherlands.

Both the Dutch and local junctions have raised humps, give way markings and space for a vehicle to wait off the main carriageway. The main difference is that in the Netherlands the cycle route has a continuous surface so it is much clearer that it continues through the junction.

Another common approach seen here on Biltstraat, a local shopping street in Utrecht, is to have a continuous pavement as well so it is absolutely clear that people walking and cycling on the main road have priority over traffic on the minor road. This is similar to our proposal for Pedestrian Priority on Gosforth High Street, which the Council consulted on but never implemented.

This fairly average street in Ijmuiden in the Netherlands (below) has a clearly marked, level straight-line route, which gives much greater separation from traffic and continues through side junctions giving people walking and cycling priority over turning vehicles.

Here is another example, of a more suburban street like the Great North Road with a central reservation with trees, bus stop and side road entrance.

The post Brunton to Broadway – final review appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

In January 2018, Newcastle City Council agreed to allow North Gosforth Parish Council the option to adopt the two stone/concrete bus shelters on the east side of the Great North Road. In the same meeting, the City Council outlined the concerns that residents had shared with them about these existing shelters and their plans to install new shelters to resolve these concerns and meet accessibility standards.

Following this meeting, the North Gosforth Parish Council confirmed it wished to pursue the option so the City Council issued statutory notices to effect this transfer, which were displayed on the two bus shelters. This is the SPACE for Gosforth response to that consultation. Pictures have been added for this blog but were not part of the response sent to the Council.

A copy of the full presentation from the January meeting is available as part of our Broadway to Brunton Cycle Lane – Consultation Review.

Re: NOTICE UNDER SECTION 115G OF THE HIGHWAYS ACT 1980

We are writing to you regarding the proposal to grant permission to North Gosforth Parish Council to maintain the Great North Road Bus Shelter(s).

We emailed the North Gosforth Parish Council on 16 April 2018 to seek further information as to their plans for the bus shelter so we had the most up to date information. While we have now received a reply it does not provide any further information on this matter. Although the Parish Council have not confirmed to us directly, we infer from the on-line Parish Council minutes that the Parish Council have not (yet) considered the concerns we raised with them. As there appears to be no plan to address those concerns we find we have no real choice but to object to the Section 115G notice(s).

We do wish to be clear that in principle we support the retention of “heritage assets” and the work of community groups to look after their local environment; so if such a plan does exist, or can be created as part of the proposed licence agreement, then we will be happy to withdraw these objections.

It is also worth noting that none of these objections should come as a surprise for anyone involved, not least that many were discussed explicitly at the January Golf Club meeting with Councillors, Council Offices, Parish Councillors and petitioners, and that there has been plenty of time and opportunity to produce a plan to resolve these concerns.

For convenience we have grouped our objections into five broad areas of concern.

1. New risks to bus passengers as a result of this proposal, especially to older or visually-impaired people.
2. Unintended negative consequences.
3. Unaddressed community concerns that informed the previous decision to replace the bus shelters.
4. The need to provide fit for purpose facilities for bus passengers.
5. Conditions for an effective consultation.

1) New risks to bus passengers as a result of this proposal.

As the cycle lane can no longer go behind the bus shelter in line with current best practice guidance, Newcastle City Council have proposed that instead the area in front of the existing shelters will become shared space. We presume this will require additional bollards / signage either side to advise of the change to and from separate lanes.

a) We would like to draw the Council’s attention to the RNIB’s campaign against shared space and the similar campaign from Guide Dogs for the Blind. While these mostly relate to people sharing with motor traffic, and while the risks of shared walking/cycling paths are much less, we feel the same broad principles should apply here. Our measurements suggest it should be possible to maintain clearly identified separate space at this location with or without the retention of the current bus shelters and that the proposal should not proceed until this is confirmed.

Stone / Concrete shelter with measurements

b) The location of the shelter on the far side of the pavement means that people wishing to use the shelter will have to cross the cycle lane when the bus is arriving in order to attract the bus driver’s attention. This means their attention will be focused on the bus rather than on approaching cyclists, which could put them and the person/people approaching at risk as a result.

c) Further, as the sides of the stone shelter are not transparent, and with no plans to improve visibility, anyone approaching on a cycle may not see or be aware that someone is waiting for a bus and might step out unannounced.

In contrast, the original proposal for the cycle lane to go behind the bus shelter would have allowed bus passengers to cross the cycle lane on arrival and then not have to worry about people cycling when boarding a bus. Likewise, the design of the replacement bus shelters would have ensured maximum visibility between people cycling and those getting on or off a bus.

2) Unintended negative consequences.

We have identified a number of likely unintended consequences that we also feel need addressing as part of this proposal. Items (a) to (c) arise as a result of the issues stated above.

a) If the proposed shared space makes people feel less safe then it is likely to discourage people from using local public transport, making it more likely they will drive instead, adding to congestion and reducing air quality for all road users.

b) It would also reduce the usability of the cycle lane for people doing longer journeys who wish to cycle more quickly. This would encourage people to continue to cycle in the bus lane, potentially delaying buses and reducing the safety benefits that should be achieved through implementation of this scheme.

c) Designed-in conflicts such as those highlighted above will, in the long term, risk eroding community support for similar schemes in future, which are critical to achieve widely-supported policy objectives relating to air quality, public health and children’s wellbeing. We understand that funding is not always available for the highest quality designs, however in this case the Council has already outlined an approach that is within budget and avoids these issues.

d) We understand that the Council had intended to make revenue from advertising on these bus shelters and we presume this future revenue stream, though perhaps not of great consequence, will now be lost. We do feel, however, that the Council should be clear in the licensing terms as to what advertising is allowed to avoid the possibility of large and unsightly advertising, to set out how any advertising revenue is to be split and/or how (or if) the Council is to be compensated for forgoing this revenue.

Existing bus stop by Melton Park

3) Unaddressed community concerns that informed the previous decision to replace the bus shelters.

In December 2015, the City Council published a consultation to provide for safe cycling and improved crossing facilities on the Great North Road. That consultation, which was widely publicised, included the proposal to remove the stone/concrete bus shelters and no comments were received at that time regarding the shelters.

At the January 2018 Golf Club meeting with petitioners and Parish Councillors seeking to overturn the results of the previous consultation, the Council highlighted a number of concerns that residents had raised with them and with Nexus. If the stone shelters are to be retained these concerns need to be addressed and a funded mitigation plan put in place. The concerns listed by the Council were:

a) Issues of personal security where passengers could not be seen inside, or be seen by bus drivers.

b) That people do not feel the stone shelters give a good image of modern public transport – e.g. challenges with installing seating and real-time information.

c) Specific requests to replace the shelters, particularly amongst women (reasons not given).

d) Difficult to clean if subject to graffiti.

e) Discussions in local on-line forums have also highlighted that people feel the existing shelters are dark, have no seat and are a bit smelly.

Slide on Bus Shelters presented by the City Council in January

4) The need to provide fit for purpose facilities for bus passengers.

At the same meeting the Council outlined its intention to improve bus shelters across the city. Any plan to transfer maintenance of bus shelters should ensure all of the following Council-proposed objectives will be fully met at these locations for the benefit of current and future bus passengers.

a) Visibility (between people waiting and approaching buses/cycles)

b) Security (stated to be a particular issue for women)

c) Seating – ‘perch’ (benefiting older passengers and those with mobility difficulties)

d) Real time / data ready.

e) In addition, we have identified that roof and window heights are not suitable for taller people, and that people using a wheelchair are unlikely to be able to see out of the window to see approaching buses.

What you would see if sat on a seat at the back of the shelter

5) Conditions for an effective consultation.

Whilst the original Broadway to Brunton lane consultations were widely publicised to local residents and contained detailed information about the proposals, as well as opportunities to speak directly to Council staff about those proposals, the consultation for this transfer gives practically no information and only minimal opportunity for the community to express an opinion.

Given a main subject of the petition that lead to this proposal was the need for effective consultation, we are surprised that the petitioners themselves have not called for a wider consultation, have not sought to publicise the opportunity to comment and have not provided available information to residents about the pros and cons of this proposal to allow residents to come to an informed decision.

We do understand that it will never be possible to have a perfect consultation, but as a minimum this consultation should set out the main consequences of retaining the bus shelters and state how the issues identified will be addressed to ensure a good quality outcome for residents and bus passengers.

Given the retention of the current bus shelters would result in a change to the street design from that previously advertised, we feel the consultation should also be treated in a similar manner to a traffic consultation and include engagement with all affected user groups including those representing the visually impaired or people with disabilities more generally. In this regard, the Council has made a commitment via its Street Charter to “take additional steps to make sure blind and partially sighted people are fully consulted on all shared space proposals”.

Extract from the Newcastle City Council Street Charter

The consultation is also lacking detail on what is intended by granting permission to maintain the shelter, for example:

• Is any particular level of maintenance committed to?
• Will there be a facility for reporting urgent issues and how will the Parish Council ensure a quick response?
• Is the Parish Council committing to ensure compliance with relevant legislation e.g. if the shelter is found not to be compliant with the Equalities act because it is not easily usable by people with wheelchairs and/or people with mobility issues that mean they cannot stand for long periods, is it the Council or the Parish Council that will undertake and fund changes to put this right?
• In the unlikely event of a major structural failure (which could be due to a failure in the maintenance regime) would the City Council or the Parish Council be liable for the cost of rebuilding the shelter and/or for injury or death caused by the collapse of the shelter? We note the Council briefed petitioners (including Parish Councillors) at the January meeting that similar structures in the UK had collapsed following collisions, leading to the death of people waiting inside.
• If the Parish Council is liable but does not have assets to cover these liabilities, how would the Council recover the uncovered costs?

Notice displayed in the Great North Road bus shelters

Next Steps

Our objective in sending these comments is to help improve the scheme to ensure it is the best quality possible for residents and bus users, which I am sure is an objective shared by both the City and Parish Councils; and to ensure effective community engagement in the process.

We understand that as the formal deadline for comments has passed the Council and/or the Parish Council could ask that these concerns are disregarded, however we do not see why it would be in anyone’s interest to do so. As stated above, pretty much all of these concerns have been raised previously so there should be no excuse for not already having plans to address these.

For reference, SPACE for Gosforth’s previous blogs on the Broadway to Brunton scheme can be found at this link https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/tag/broadway/ We will publish this letter as a further blog in the near future.

Yours faithfully,

On behalf of SPACE for Gosforth
www.spaceforgosforth.com

The post GNR Bus Shelters appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

• Consultation
• Street Trees and Bus Shelters
• Newcastle City Council Update | 8 January 2018
• Newcastle City Council Update | 9 February 2018

Newcastle City Council have published their final plans for the Broadway to Brunton Cycle Lane and construction is due to start soon in a series of phases to minimise disruption.

As we said in our review of the initial consultation, residents’ feedback showed that there was broad support, with most people agreeing with the aims of the scheme but with a number of detail points that needed addressing. In this blog we take a look at the consultation process and the changes made by the Council as a result of that feedback.

Residents’ feedback on the proposals from the Commonplace website.

The new cycle route should be suitable for residents of all ages and abilities and, apart from two short sections, the use of shared space where people walking and cycling are expected to use the same space has been avoided. The new crossings will make it easier for local residents to cross the Great North Road, especially at the Three Mile Inn where currently there is only a footbridge that is not useable for people with mobility issues.

As well as increasing the choice for how people can travel, wider benefits for the community include better health for those who walk or cycle, better air quality for everybody and fewer cars on the road for those who travel by car or bus. The new cycle lanes will also help people access local shops and potentially allow families to cycle to schools, including Broadway East following its proposed relocation to The Great Park. Current middle and high schools for children in this area are all south of Broadway and there are no alternative routes.

https://youtu.be/6ryvzvla1sQ

“Fly through” video of the original proposal produced by Newcastle City Council.

Consultation

The initial consultation, based on the City Council Transport Development Process, was via the Commonplace website at the end of 2015 where comments can still be viewed. In addition the Council held three community drop-in meetings in Brunton Park where residents could submit comments on paper forms. According to the engagement report over 900 people visited the Commonplace website with 120 attending the drop-ins.

To publicise the consultation the Council sent letters to everyone living in Brunton Park, Melton Park and Melbury (the purple boundary on the map) as well as to statutory consultees including  local councillors, MPs, emergency services, bus and taxi companies, disability groups, walking and cycling groups (though not SPACE for Gosforth), the Federation of Small Businesses and the Chamber of Commerce, the Freight Transport Association and the Road Haulage Association.

SPACE for Gosforth also shared a blog with some thoughts on the proposals via our Facebook, Twitter and other local social media sites.

Local councillors in the Parklands ward shared news on the proposal via the Parklands Focus newsletters, reporting in issue 41 on a meeting supported by the Council transport department that was attended by 150 local residents. Further updates were provided in issues 42 and 43.

We also know that North Gosforth Parish Council discussed this matter regularly at their meetings and met council officers on a number of occasions to discuss the entrance to the service road and other concerns. Minutes of parish council meetings are posted on community noticeboards.

There was further opportunity to comment in August 2016 when the Council sought views on an amendment to the entrance to the GNR service road north of Polwarth Drive to respond to concerns raised by residents on that road.

A separate consultation was held for the toucan crossing by the Three Mile Inn in November 2016, which SPACE for Gosforth also wrote about here. This consultation, in part because of concerns about the adjacent footbridge, was also shared widely on social media and via  two Chronicle articles: Fears over plan to ‘axe’ Gosforth footbridge crossing one of Newcastle’s busiest roads and Community is divided over plans for pedestrian crossing at key city route.

For both the cycle lane and toucan crossing a further and final stage of consultation was held on the legal traffic orders. At this stage letters were sent to those directly affected by the works (in the blue boundary on the map), residents with whom the Council had discussed plans, as well as to statutory consultees, with adverts placed on local lampposts and in the local press and on-line via the Let’s Talk Newcastle website.

Objections submitted at this stage were considered by the Traffic, Regulatory and Appeals Sub-Committee (RASC). The minutes for these meetings can be found here for the cycle lane and here for the toucan crossing. This completed the consultation process.

Design Changes

A number of design changes were made to the scheme as can be seen by comparing the initial design, available here, with the final version published on the Council website.

Two overall changes have been made. One is that the final plan does not include the original proposal to reduce the speed of this road to 30mph from 40mph, although a 30mph limit will be in force during road works. We believe the Council still intend to do this but via a separate proposal.

The second is that in a number of places the cycle lane has been re-aligned to be alongside the footpath although still in its own space. We understand this was partly to reduce costs but also helps to minimise tree loss across the scheme. It will also make it more comfortable for people cycling being further away from traffic.

The Three Mile Inn Toucan Crossing

The following plan was published as part of the consultation for the Three Mile Inn Toucan crossing to help people cross who are unable to use the bridge due to mobility issues and for those that wish to cross with a cycle. This also showed updated plans for the adjacent bus stops and a statement saying that the footbridge would be removed once the Toucan crossing is installed, though the consultation itself was only in relation to the crossing.

In this original plan, additional pavement space was included for people waiting for or alighting from buses. People walking or cycling past the bus stops would go behind this new pavement with continuous lanes unlike further south where the space behind these boarding areas is shared. Although relatively new for Newcastle this arrangement is thoroughly proven in other UK locations and in countries with more established cycling cultures.

Three Mile Inn Toucan Crossing – Original Plan

The final plans however show that the footbridge will not be removed as part of this scheme, no doubt in part due to the Keep Our Three Mile Footbridge Petition. If the footbridge requires maintenance or removal in future this will have to be funded out of general council budgets.

While the south-bound bus stop design is unchanged, on the north-bound side the separate lanes have been merged to be shared as the support struts for the retained footbridge mean there is insufficient space for separate walking and cycling paths. This appears to be an inadvertent negative consequence of the petition, although if the bridge is removed in future it would be possible to reconfigure this area to have separated space as was originally planned.

Three Mile Inn – Final Plans

McCracken Park to Polwarth Drive

This section is the most changed between the original and final plans. Comments on the original plan focused on car parking for residents living south of the roundabout, lack of (and provision of) two way cycling and access to the service road. The latter was a subject of a petition documented in the Chronicle Petition against ‘dangerous’ Great North Road cycle route to be heard by Newcastle City Council.

Polwarth Drive roundabout – Original Plans

The Council, we know, had a number of discussions with residents of the GNR service road about access. Following an automated traffic count that showed very low volumes of traffic, the Council agreed to leave this open for access but with a raised hump to slow vehicle speeds off the roundabout to ensure safety of all who might be cycling.

Traffic Volumes and Speeds on the Great North Road Service Road

The final plans also show:

• On-street parking provision south of the roundabout.
• The toucan crossing now has dedicated and separate walking and cycling paths rather than shared space and is moved slightly closer to the roundabout. This means the south-bound bus stop is slightly closer for people coming from or going to Brunton Park.
• An extension to the 2-way cycle lane to McCracken Park so people leaving McCracken Park can travel directly to Brunton Park and not have to go via the Three Mile Inn crossing.
• The geometry of the roundabout has also been changed to reduce the speeds of vehicles entering Polwarth Drive from the south.

Polwarth Drive roundabout – Final Plans

Newlands Avenue to Norwood Avenue

The GNR crossing between Newlands and Norwood Avenue is the other part of the scheme that uses shared space. This has been retained to avoid tree loss at this location that would have been required with a wider separate paths. The wiggle is for a similar purpose to route the path around an existing mature tree.

In addition, there is a new section of 2-way cycle track to allow people from Newlands Avenue to travel north directly rather than have to go south first via the crossing south of Polwarth Drive, which would have been a considerable diversion.

Newlands Avenue to Norwood Avenue – Final Plans

Brunton Lane

At Brunton Lane the shared space on the crossing has again been replaced by separate cycle and walking paths. In addition footpaths into Glamis Avenue that were shown as being removed in the original plans have been retained. The only other difference is a minor change to the west side of the crossing so people cycling are directed straight onto the service road.

Brunton Lane – Original Plans

Brunton Lane – Final Plans

Requests for change not incorporated into the final plans

Not all feedback led to changes. In considering feedback, council officers have to take account of safety and comfort of road users (especially vulnerable road users), council policy, scheme objectives and budgets. Even if a proposed change is extremely popular it still might not be accepted if, for example it might put some groups in danger or cost more than is available in the scheme budget.

The table below sets out the main requests that were not taken forward and the reasons for that decision. As a number relate to one-way vs two-way cycling, it is worth noting that in cities and countries where cycling is more established, a road this wide would almost certainly have two-way cycle tracks on both sides of the road so that people cycling always have a direct route without having to cross the road (and potentially require traffic to stop) multiple times.

Street Trees and Bus Shelters

While the formal consultation finished in March 2017 with the RASC meeting for the Three Mile Inn toucan crossing, late changes have been sought in the last few days before work is due to commence by individuals running a local Facebook group in relation to two stone bus stop shelters marked for removal and, according to their site, 13 trees of which about half would be scheduled for removal in any case due to being in a poor condition. [See Update 8/1/2017 below for Council figures relating to trees]

At this late stage we believe the Council has no duty or obligation to take these points into account. Almost certainly contracts will have been signed for contractors to undertake the work, and equipment and other resources scheduled to be ready for work to commence. Any delay at this stage could increase costs for the Council, which may need to be funded by local taxpayers.

Having said that, if it is possible for the Council to consider these points without delaying completion of the scheme or incurring additional costs for taxpayers then we have no reason to object to that. Street trees in particular are an important part of the character of Gosforth and can help mitigate a number of the public health issues suffered by residents as a result of an excess of traffic. If it is possible to retain healthy mature trees then we would support that.

Extract from the original plans

It is worth noting that both issues were considered as part of the consultation. The two stone bus shelters were specifically marked for removal and trees were mentioned by quite a few residents in their feedback mostly (but not all) in favour of retaining trees where possible.

We hope therefore that the Council will be able to present a reasoned and balanced view as to why these aspects of the scheme are as proposed so that we can all be properly informed as to the pros and cons of retaining the existing street trees and bus shelters vs replacing the bus shelters and planting additional trees to replace those that would be removed.

Lessons

Our main disappointment on this scheme is that it has taken so long from the original consultation to work commencing. With significant benefits promised, certainly compared to comparable more expensive traffic schemes, and with broad community support it should be expected that the work could have been complete far quicker. The city of Seville in Spain transformed its entire city in less time, with 50 miles of new protected all-ability cycle lanes and an eleven-fold increase in cycling.

That said, the incorporation of feedback into the scheme has clearly led to improvements compared to the original plans and we support the importance of the Council engaging with residents to seek input and support. There will always be calls for more communication and engagement, both of which we support, however we also recognise that there must be a point of diminishing return beyond which the cost of further consultation will outweigh any potential benefits.

Ultimately there is a need for leadership by councillors and council officers to learn these lessons to make sure future schemes are designed in a consistent manner both to meet best practice and to take into account known issues of community interest and concern.

Just as importantly we need leadership to create a sense of urgency to resolve issues with air quality, health and a lack of choice for how we travel that are currently designed into our environment.

Update 8/1/2018

Newcastle City Council have released a statement published in the Chronicle which clarifies the number of trees affected and, which relate to the cycle route and which are to be removed for unconnected reasons:

“We have designed dedicated cycle facilities on the Great North Road, between Broadway and Brunton Lane, in order to make the area – a well-used cycle route, including by people riding to schools – safer for those on bikes.

“As part of the development we have identified that three trees, of differing ages and quality, would need to be removed for the project. A further eight trees, while not required for the project, may also be removed for other reasons, one of these trees we consider to be dangerous due to its condition.

“Two stone bus shelters, which are unpopular with many passengers – though apparently popular with others in the community – would also need to be removed and would be replaced by shelters that include seats.

“One of the three trees that need to be removed is a very young tree that we would replant and we would then be planting two more trees for every one that is removed.

“A petition from people objecting to the loss of trees and bus shelters will be presented to a meeting of the city council on Wednesday [10 January 2018]. Work will not start until after councillors’ response to the petition has been taken into account.”

Update 9/2/2018

On Tuesday 24 January SPACE for Gosforth attended a meeting organised by Newcastle City Council in response to the Gosforth Traffic Facebook page petition relating specifically to the removal of trees and the two stone bus shelters on the east of the Great North Road.

This is the Council’s update giving a summary of actions agreed at the meeting including the opportunity for the North Gosforth Parish Council to adopt the stone bus shelters and a number of other points raised by residents during the meeting. The update also includes copies of the slides presented at that meeting.

Further information and updates are available from the City Council website for the scheme. Work on the scheme started on Monday 29 January, initially including the introduction of a temporary 30mph speed limit and application of new lane markings on the road.

Broadway to Brunton Update February 2018

A petition, organised by Gosforth Traffic, a social media community site, that challenged the removal of trees and stone bus shelters was presented to the January meeting of the City Council. At the direction of Cllr Ainsley, Cabinet Member for Transport and Air Quality, a meeting was subsequently arranged between council officers and local ward councillors, petitioners, and other community groups who had been in touch about the Broadway to Brunton scheme including Save Newcastle Wildlife and SPACE for Gosforth.

The actions arising from the meeting on Tuesday January 24^thwere:

• to have a site meeting on Newlands Avenue with local residents;
• to investigate an alternative compound location;
• to consider fencing off around the group of 9 trees on the eastern side of the carriageway in the vicinity of Glamis Avenue;
• to provide background data on collision statistics;
• to contact the Parish Council regarding the potential for an asset transfer of the stone bus shelters; and
• to consider writing to all local residents to inform them of the scheme and what would happen next.

Following this meeting, and the subsequent site meeting we have had further correspondence by email and have responded below.

Whether or not all residents in the surrounding area will be sent a letter to provide them with a full update on the scheme?

At this point, no they will not. We will be posting information online and also providing updates to people whose email addresses we have. We will be sending out further updates about the scheme as we progress to future phases of works.

Can we use an alternative site compound?

 Yes, an alternative site compound is being used.

 What is the timeline for removal of trees?

The trees are currently programmed to be removed in the week commencing Monday 12.02.18 (weather and existing workload permitting). Even if not removed next week, all trees that need to be removed, will be before the end of February.

The sapling located in the central reserve that was identified for replanting was replanted on Monday 05.02.18. Following further investigations, another tree has been identified for removal, this tree is not being removed to facilitate the scheme, it is being removed due to structural defects making it potentially dangerous. This is a tree at the entrance to Melton Park / Newlands Ave and was identified when council arborists were on site in the two weeks following the meeting.

The survey of the central reservation trees as discussed at the meeting will be undertaken when the funding is confirmed, hopefully during the summer months and any removals and replanting, plus the east verge planting, will take place during the next planting season November 2018 to February 2019.

What information is available on trees?

Please see presentation slides attached. As noted above an additional mature tree adjacent to and south of Newlands Ave junction has been identified as being in a dangerous condition and will require removal at the same time. As discussed at the meeting, the Council will also remove the tarmac around the group of 9 trees and fence these off for the period of the works to support them.

What is the situation with the bus shelters?

As discussed at the meeting, the Parish Council are keen to explore taking on responsibility for these shelters. Since the meeting, Officers have been in touch with a Parish Councillor who was at the meeting and a briefing pack has been issued to all Parish Councillors earlier this week.

At the site meeting, residents discussed their concerns over changes to the height of crossing over Newlands Avenue – has anything been done?

Following on from the site meeting, we do intend to install the raised table at Newlands Avenue but with amendments to the design to take into account comments we have received. The raised table will now have a 14m long approach ramp that will only provide an increase in gradient from 6.3% to 6.8%. To mitigate this marginal increase we will resurface the carriageway in a material with higher skid resistance than the existing road. In addition, we will review the requirement for a grit bin in this location when we undertake our annual review of bin locations in preparation for the following winter.

Residents have concerns about the specifics of the design giving indication that people on foot or bikes have ‘priority’ as they pass over the junctions. Why is the Council providing this priority?

The type of crossing proposed at Newlands Avenue, where people on foot and bikes do have priority, can be found in many UK and European cities and elsewhere in Newcastle.  We are trying to promote a more tolerant mix of road users, where vigilance and awareness of our most vulnerable is expected and understood. Such measures help to reduce speeds and the principle of slowing motor vehicles at crossing points to and from residential areas is reasonable.

Why is the Council not undertaking an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) to remove the bus lane during the works or change the operating hours to being peaks hours only?

It is important to note that an ETRO is only an appropriate use of power if there is the intention to make the Traffic Regulation Order permanent at the end of the ‘experiment’. Bus Lanes are in place to enable buses to get priority and are generally placed in locations to enable advance access to key junctions. The review of bus lanes we’ve recently undertaken does not recommend moving toward operation only in peak hours however despite this we note your request and will give it further consideration during the period of the delivery of this scheme.

Why are bus lanes out of action?

As noted at the meeting, the first elements of work are to remove the road markings and then re-lay them. We cannot do this work in live running lanes so the lane has been suspended while our sub-contractors undertake this work to remove, and then re-apply road markings. When this is done it will have created sufficient space for us to keep the running lanes at two for the majority of the work.

What is the work you have been doing in the past week?

We have been preparing the eastern side of the carriageway for the installation of a cycleway, in line with the scheme designs. The petition and subsequent discussions have been on aspects of design and the future of the stone shelters.

Please can we have a breakdown of costs?

Please see the Finance section of the report that accompanied the Delegated Decision.

http://democracy.newcastle.gov.uk/documents/s121681/REPORT.pdf

Where is the funding coming from?

Please see the Finance section of the report that accompanied the Delegated Decision.

http://democracy.newcastle.gov.uk/documents/s121681/REPORT.pdf

Please can you explain the increase in costs?

 We do not agree that there has been an increase in costs. The scheme has been estimated at various stages and an appropriate contingency level given at each stage. The report referenced above outlines the cost of the scheme.

Please can you provide the data that you using to justify the safety improvements?

Data on road traffic collisions can be found here. We use an algorithm that ‘clusters’ locations of collisions and resulting injuries which enables us to understand how different areas of the city are performing in terms of road safety. The algorithm takes into account the number of injuries in different years and we use a ‘rolling’ five year average to ensure that the impact of collisions and resulting injuries are understood but that one incident in a location does not disproportionately distort consideration of ‘hotspots’. Example maps are attached that show the position before the series of changes on Great North Road took place. We have included maps that show injuries to all users of the highway network, and also those specifically on bikes.

Please can you provide details of cycle counts and locations of counters

Information is attached that shows cycle counts for the stretch of cycle route between Broadway Roundabout and Hollywood Avenue. If you would like further information on cycle count data please go to https://gis.gateshead.gov.uk/gatesheadmaps/ctf/app.html. On this website you can view an online map that shows counters and data that can be retrieved directly.

These were the slides that were presented at the meeting on 24th January

The post Broadway to Brunton Cycle Lane – Consultation Review appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

You can add your comments on the Let’s Talk Newcastle Website.  Feedback must be provided by 9 November 2016.

The existing crossing by the Three Mile Inn is a pedestrian footbridge, accessed by a stepped ramp which can become icy in cold weather. While many people can use this footbridge, some will find this a challenge and some will not be able to use it at all. In particular the stepped staircase design means that it cannot be used by people with limited mobility or those needing to use a wheelchair. Department for Transport design guidelines relating to the use of steps and ramps by disabled people suggest that curved staircases should be avoided and that the maximum number of risers in a flight should be 12, with resting places between successive flights. The Three Mile bridge staircase is both curved and has far more than 12 steps without a break.

This is also important as without a usable crossing, the same groups who cannot use the footbridge will not be able to easily access bus services located on the opposite side of the Great North Road.

The stepped ramp access to the Three Mile Footbridge – Click for Google Streetview

Making roads and crossings accessible for disabled people is also a matter of law.

“The Equality Act 2010 states that it is unlawful for a public authority to discriminate in the exercise of its public functions. This includes highways functions. Section 20 (4) requires that where a physical feature (which includes increases in traffic) puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in comparison to a person who is not disabled, an authority is required to take such steps as is reasonable to have to take to avoid the disadvantage.” Source: RNIB information on crossings.

Many people however are drawn to the footbridge by the perception of greater safety compared to other crossings over the Great North Road and a petition by the administrators of the Gosforth Traffic Facebook page to retain the footbridge, potentially in addition to the new crossing, has reached a large number of signatories in a short timescale.

Newcastle has examples of newer footbridges that satisfy accessibility requirements such as this one on Scotswood Road where users can choose between gently angled ramps or flights of steps to reach the crossing. From the picture you can see that such an arrangement would require considerably more space than is readily available at the Three Mile Inn, and even if space were available would most likely require the complete replacement of the existing bridge.

Gentle incline on ramps provides for accessibility – click for Google Streetview

Concerns about road safety, and whether drivers will stop at a red signal, are reflected in the comments on the petition.  While traffic signals are an accepted means of controlling traffic and generally provide for safe crossings, it is also the case that this section of the Great North Road is currently laid out in the style of an urban motorway with motorway-style crash barriers on one side and pedestrian guardrails along the median. These, and the footbridge itself, all create the visual impression of a road that should be driven at speed even though it is the main (and only) walking and cycling route between schools south of the Three Mile crossing and Brunton Park, Melton Park and Great Park housing estates.

Guardrails, motorway barriers and the footbridge itself all create visual cues to encourage speeding – click for Google Streetview

Though this may not be sufficient by itself, introducing a new crossing at this point will start to change the look and feel of the street to encourage slower and safer driving.  This will address safety concerns by reducing the danger as well as making the street more accessible, with minimal impact on overall journey times for people travelling north to south.

Plans were also consulted on in July 2016 to reduce the speed limit on this section of road from 40mph to 30mph.  As we have highlighted in a previous post a collision at 40mph means an 80% chance an adult would be killed or seriously injured whereas this reduces to a 40% chance at 30mph (and 17% at 20mph).

Likewise, we hope the pedestrian guardrails and motorway barriers can also be removed.  Reviews of pedestrian guardrails have shown that they have little or no impact on overall safety but do have some significant disadvantages. In this location it is possible that people exiting the Three Mile Inn might try to cross the road only to find they are trapped against the railings with traffic approaching and no where to go. Guardrails are also a potential hazard for motorcyclists in the event of a collision.

It is also worth noting that with 650m between adjacent crossings, this is the longest stretch of the Great North Road without a level accessible crossing. The nearest crossing point is at the Broadway roundabout junction over 200m away.

The total distance to walk up to the crossing at Broadway and back down to the Three Mile Inn is approximately a quarter of a mile, though individual journeys such as from Greystoke Park to the Three Mile Inn could be longer.

At 3mph, a reasonable pace for a fit and healthy adult, it will take roughly 5 minutes to walk this route, not including the waiting time at the crossing itself.

For someone with limited mobility this could make the difference between whether they can complete their journey or not.

The next crossing point walking North is twice the distance away and as a result even more impractical.

The Let’s Talk Newcastle Website includes the plan for the new crossing (copied below), the Council’s statement of reasons and the formal notice.  Although the plans include an intention to remove the footbridge once the Toucan (walking and cycling) crossing has been constructed, this is not part of the current formal process and itself may be subject to further review.

The plan for the Toucan Crossing which is shown in red also shows the proposed, but not yet implemented, off-road cycle lanes that was consulted on in July.  These should also help make this section of road safer, especially for children cycling to school who will no longer have to choose between riding in the traffic or in conflict with pedestrians on the pavement.

SPACE for Gosforth does not comment as a group on the Council’s plans so if you want to support the implementation of the proposed Toucan crossing you need to provide feedback on the Let’s Talk Newcastle website.  The closing date for feedback is 9 November 2016.

The post Great North Road – Proposed Toucan Crossing appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Judging by the 78 responses to the ‘Broadway to Brunton Lane’ consultation most people agree with the aims of the scheme, not least the prospect of a cycle lane safe for children to use, though there are a few details to work through.

This is a summary of what people said.

As we said in our previous article here the current road layout is poor for those walking and cycling. Comments reflected this.

“I don’t think most people realise just what an awful road this is now if you are walking or cycling. I saw one comment below saying there’s not much demand for cycling this stretch of road. Being hit by a car travelling at 40mph is equivalent to falling out of a 5th floor window and, strangely, there’s not much demand for that either”

“At present I avoid cycling the Great North Road north of Broadway (I did cycle this route 2 months ago and really regretted it as I felt very vulnerable next to the fast-moving traffic) and I really resent having to drive this route as it is ridiculous to have to take the car when travelling around within Gosforth (given you can cycle from one end to the other is 20 – 30 mins) when the only real reason for needing to drive is safety.”

Not everyone sees this though.

“It is fine as it is and no changes are necessary”

“Spending money on a few cyclists is a complete waste. There are no traffic volumes, cyclist numbers, accident records or speed checks to justify any changes”

This is an exact from the Crash Map website for the area covered by the proposal. It might have been useful for the Council to have included this. Each of the “!”s represents one crash involving a casualty that was reported to the police between 2005 and 2014 (damage to cars or property only are not recorded). Orange is for a slight injury; red for a serious injury; purple for a cluster.

Tellingly, neither of these two respondents travel to this area on foot or by bike.

The scheme should benefit everyone though and this was also reflected in the breadth of support for the scheme’s aims.

Quite a few people mentioned issues in their responses. 

“Air pollution (mainly from cars) is very bad in Gosforth.”

“This road also funnels traffic into Gosforth High Street and so is responsible for a lot of the pollution issues there. With 500-odd extra homes due to be built around Wideopen we need some really good alternatives to the car ASAP otherwise the Council will be forced into putting far greater restrictions on motor traffic to meet EU health targets.”

“Gosforth is struggling to cope with the vast number of vehicles currently using the area and many of our roads, streets, roundabouts and junctions are already unable to deal with the huge volume of traffic.There are a large number of new houses planned for this area of the city, therefore improvements to alternatives to car traffic are vital otherwise gridlock will occur more often.”

Everyone benefits from less traffic and cleaner air. This Times article “I don’t ride a bike, why should I support measures to boost cycling?” sets out the case quite nicely. Studies such as this one by the Healthy Air Campaign show that it is drivers and their passengers that breathe the most polluted air in heavy traffic conditions, and therefore have most to gain. Our summary here lists some of the possible health impacts of pollution.

Back to Gosforth, these are the reasons people gave for liking the proposal.

Specific comments addressed different aspects of the proposal.

Quite a few people, many identifying themselves as residents of Greystoke Park, commented on changes proposed to the entrance to that street. This was fairly typical.

“It removes the deceleration lane from the entrance to Greystoke Park increasing the risk of accidents with following cars expecting a left turn into a) Bridge Park or b) Shell garage.”

Hopefully the reduction in speed limit to 30mph (which just about everyone supported) should mitigate this. There may be other reasons we aren’t aware of for this being a particular issue at this junction, but it’s worth noting none of the left turns in the current 30mph zone have deceleration lanes.

Quite a few people were concerned about enforcement of the new speed limit as well as other traffic issues.

“Enforcing the proposed speed limit reduction – at present there are too many infringements of traffic laws in Gosforth (speeding, drivers driving through red lights, drivers using mobile phones). This is unacceptable in a residential area.”

Others mentioned education for road users, though ideally the road layout should make it as safe as possible. This comment captures the rationale for right angle junctions.

“Ensuring that at all junctions the angle of entrance and exit is 90 degrees to ensure vehicles are travelling as slow as possible when they cross cycle lane and pavement (modelled on GNR/Forsyth Rd junction)”

Whatever the other considerations, the key focus for design must be on the most vulnerable of road users, people walking and cycling, who don’t have a metal shell with a crumple zone to protect them in the event of a crash.

The other main issue noted was the north-bound exit from the Brunton Park roundabout.

“Brunton Park roundabout – “2 into 1 won’t go!” – you have 2 lanes approaching the roundabout from the south, both indicating you can go straight ahead, but there is only one lane emerging on the north side of the roundabout – this has all the potential of an accident blackspot.”

“Given the volume of traffic heading north, correcting the existing plan to make the inside lane a compulsory left turn into Brunton Park will simply add to the congestion because the majority of drivers will be heading north and give you a problem when they either have to start filtering into the right hand lane as they approach the roundabout, or worse, decide to change lanes on the roundabout itself!”

This could be resolved by reverting to two lanes before and after the roundabout but going for a single lane might have other advantages.

“I like the fact that the number of lanes on this section of road is to be reduced, along with the speed limit. This makes it feel more like what it is (an urban road through a residential area) and less like a major dual-carriageway (as it was when it was the A1!). This will hopefully have the effect of slowing traffic speeds, reducing traffic volumes (by encouraging people to take the actual main road into the city from Cowgate), and therefore improving air quality.”

“I do wonder if two lanes are really needed for non-bus traffic going north given one is deemed sufficient going south. It would be much better if the north-bound inside lane could be used for wider pavements, turned into a green verge, or in places used for a deceleration lane or bus stops. North of the entrance to Brunton Park it could be used for an extension of the off-road cycle lane, which means a much wider range of people will use it. It would also help encourage people driving to stick to the new lower speed limit, which I also support.“

The desire for the cycle lane to be separated from motor traffic for its full length was picked up in several comments.

Other comments, though possibly not made for this purpose, give some indication of why this might be a good idea.

“A so called ‘rat run’ has been created on this service road as a result of previous junction changes on Polwarth Drive”

“At present cyclists on the service road are sometimes not aware of cars being driven on/off driveways – an exceptional amount of care is required by all concerned”

Even the sections where separation is proposed need to be carefully designed for families and  children, who are likely to be amongst the biggest users.

“Although the cycle lane is a huge improvement which will make most adults feel much more confident about cycling, many parents would still not let their children use the cycle lane right next to the road.”

“Between Fencer Court junction and McCracken Close junction there is a section of cycle lane which is too close to the road. Kids need to cycle safely here and will be too close to large buses with the potential of being knocked over by the air stream of the bus. Would you let your kids stay beyond the yellow line when the Metro train comes into the station? The same reasoning should apply for cycle lanes.”

Others are just keen to get this on the ground so they can go for a bike ride.

“I’m really looking forward to being able to use this path without fearing for my life, and taking my kids for rides to the shops in Brunton Park and on to Gosforth Park. This just wouldn’t be possible if it was another dotted line on the main carriageway.”

The two-way cycle-track attracted mixed reviews.

“Dislike the dual cycle lane on the north bound carriage way, not enough room for pedestrians.”

Presumably this is a comment about the status quo as well given the pavement width doesn’t appear to vary along the route north of the roundabout. It also needs balancing against suggestions that the dual lanes should extend for the length of the route. This, and wider pavements, would be relatively easy to achieve  if the north bound carriageway became a single lane.

“Having bi-directional cycle paths is also good given how wide this road is and, even with the extra crossings it will be a pain to get to the other side of the road. It would be great, and no doubt safer, if children going to the High School could cycle all the way from Brunton Park without having to cross the main road.”

Comparisons with Broadway roundabout were inevitable.

“the plan must allow sufficient space between the point of turning off the GNR and the side road zebra crossings. This is so that drivers making a turn off the GNR can see pedestrians and pedestrians can see traffic coming. The side road zebra crossings should all have central reservations so that pedestrians don’t have to monitor traffic coming from both directions at the same time.”

“I hope there won’t be ‘cyclists dismount’ signs at each of the junctions as there is at Broadway.”

The current entry to Polwarth Drive

And one person (a driver and bus user) offered a proposal that would improve safety at the Broadway roundabout itself.

“Approaching Broadway Roundabout coming past Three Mile Inn should be reduced to 20mph”

A couple of comments mentioned issues with using the footbridge by the Three Mile Inn

“It fails to address the problem pedestrians have crossing the road at Three Mile. The bridge is often unusable (wind, rain, ice), and the distance to the pedestrian crossings are too far for elderly people.”

The footbridge by the Three Mile Inn

Others suggested ideas that would reduce traffic along the length of the Great North Road. 

“Better signs on the A1 to encourage drivers to use the Park and Ride at Brunton Park, and running the Park and Ride bus on Sundays.”

“Also more needs to be done to encourage long distance motorists to use the Western Bypass rather than rat-running through Gosforth, which is already congested and polluted due to the number of through vehicles.”

And everyone will agree with this.

“Construction work should be done in the shortest possible time, with the least inconvenience to residents and road users.”

You can see the full set of comments here on the Commonplace website: https://gosforth.commonplace.is/schemes/proposal/bruntonlane/details

This was the SPACE for Gosforth view: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/broadway-to-brunton-lane-comments-required-by-21-december-2015/

The post Broadway to Brunton Lane | Consultation Review appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Currently this is a busy dual carriageway with frequent buses and fast-moving traffic: it is hard for pedestrians to cross and is largely unsuited to all but the bravest of cyclists.  It is also the single main route into Brunton Park, Melton Park and the other estates adjoining the Great North Road. 

The Council’s proposals address these issues with the addition of good quality cycle tracks, separate from the road and from the pavement, and with additional pedestrian crossings. On that basis we think it deserves our support. 

SPACE for Gosforth does not comment as a group on the Council’s plans so if you want these changes to happen, or to provide feedback, you must log on to the Commonplace website and share your view.  Don’t forget to set the bar at the top saying whether you feel positively or negatively about the scheme.

Click on the image to see the plan (launches Adobe pdf)

A few people from SPACE for Gosforth got together and came up with these more detailed thoughts.  Feel free to add your own thoughts, questions and feedback as comments as well as on the Commonplace website.

By creating the proposed separated cycle track these proposals will:

• Make it possible for anyone to cycle along the Great North Road including families, children and less confident cyclists.
• Create a safe route to the six schools close to the Great North Road and to other schools nearby.
• Provide a quick route to cycle into Gosforth High Street and beyond. Brunton Lane to the top of the High Street should take less than 10 minutes’ cycling.
• Create a safer route for those living in Newcastle to access the countryside and leisure routes north of Newcastle.
• Provide an alternative to a car for those living in The Great Park and on the planned new housing developments near Wideopen, which will add several hundred more houses north of Newcastle.
• Reduce pavement cycling.
• Help complete the Great North Cycleway, between Darlington and Blyth.

The reduction in the speed limit from 40mph to 30mph will:

• Reduce the number of crashes and reduce the severity of any crashes that do happen.
• Help residents access their drives safely
• Reduce the speed of traffic in the approach to the Broadway roundabout.

Two new and one improved pedestrian crossing will make it easier to cross the GNR and for those in Melton Park and the other estates on the east side to access shops and services in Brunton Park and the Great Park and vice versa.

Raised tables should slow traffic at junctions where collisions are most likely.

All this has been achieved with virtually no loss of road space for motor vehicles.

We would also ask the Council to look at the following points.

1. Including design features to encourage slower traffic speeds, for example tighter turns at junctions.
2. Enforcement of the new speeds limits.
3. Considering whether the north-bound section north of Polwarth Drive can have the continuation of separated space for people walking and cycling so the whole route is suitable for families and children.

Please log on to the Commonplace website to confirm your support and/or provide any feedback. If you do not do this then your views will not be taken into account in the further development of this scheme.

The post Broadway to Brunton Lane – Comments by 21 December 2015 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.