Infographic from Newcastle City Council’s consultation website

Newcastle City Council recently consulted on the replacement to the current “Local Plan”. This is SPACE for Gosforth’s response. You can find out more about the consultation and questions asked in our previous blog Local Plan 2040.

Re: Newcastle Local Plan Early Engagement

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Newcastle upon Tyne Local Plan.

We are a community group based in Gosforth, Newcastle upon Tyne. SPACE stands for Safe Pedestrian and Cycling Environment. Our group was established in 2015 due to residents’ concerns about road danger and air pollution in our local neighbourhood. You can find our group objectives on our website www.spaceforgosforth.com/about.

While transport is only part of what is needed to achieve the city’s ambitions, it is fundamental to how the city uses its public spaces, and critical to whether the city will achieve its ambitions or not.

We support the Council’s intention that “At the core of the Newcastle Plan there needs to be a strong emphasis on placemaking, health and wellbeing, and sustainable living which will help us reach Net Zero” and agree that “these are critical to Newcastle’s strength as a place, to the city’s ability to adapt to the climate crisis and to improve the lives of residents.”

Walking, wheeling and cycling improve health and wellbeing, improve sustainability and support good quality placemaking.

This was recognised in the Development and Allocations Plan which said, “Improving accessibility for walking and cycling has multiple benefits, including the creation of safer, more attractive places, improved physical and mental health and reduced carbon emissions and climate change impacts from transport.” This new Local Plan should build on this with an even stronger focus on walking and cycling and sustainable travel.

By 2030, the city should already be well on the way to achieving Net Zero, including for transport. The future Local Plan should therefore ensure further development will be consistent with this, minimising additional emissions from development, ensuring new homes are carbon neutral and ensuring new developments prioritise walking and cycling.

Walking and cycling support all the Local Plan’s nine ambitions as follows.

1. Healthier City

• The benefits of exercise to physical and mental health are well-known. Good quality walking and cycling infrastructure allows people to build exercise into their normal daily activities, saving money and benefiting the environment at the same time.
• Access to low-cost transport like walking and cycling makes it easier to access local services and facilities.
• Reducing traffic makes places more sociable by reducing severance; and reduces air and noise pollution that adversely affect health.

2. Greener City

• Reducing traffic is essential as part of achieving Net Zero. Even with an ambitious transition to EVs, a cut of approximately 20% of total miles driven will be required to meet carbon budgets targeting Net Zero by 2050. A greater reduction will be required in Newcastle because of its 2030 target and because urban areas are better suited for alternatives to car travel than rural areas.
• Walking and cycling, as well as being carbon neutral, take up less space. That freed-up space can be used for green infrastructure like sustainable urban drainage or street trees.

3. Attractive Neighbourhoods

• Street layouts should make walking and cycling the natural choice for local journeys in line with Government ambition. That means safe, direct, connected routes between homes and local services.
• Reducing traffic will address severance issues that prevent people from accessing local shops and services.
• Research has shown people walking or cycling spend more money locally, protecting local services and making neighbourhoods more attractive.
• Road layouts at district centres like Gosforth High Street need to fully prioritise walking and cycling to maximise access to shops and services for the local community in the catchment of the centre.

4. Employment Opportunities

• Good quality walking and cycling infrastructure enables better access to local employment opportunities, especially for those on a low income who cannot afford a car or taxis.
• Quality and accessibility of the street environment is a potential competitive advantage that will attract more employers to the city. Currently Newcastle is getting left behind as other cities invest in removing traffic from city centres and residential areas.
• Good quality walking and cycling infrastructure is also helpful for students who typically will not have access to a car, and makes Newcastle an attractive place to live for people who are able to work from home.
• Premium land currently used for roads or parking could be utilised in more economically beneficial ways.

5. Moving Around

• The Local Plan must ensure “new development promotes sustainable transport choices, patterns of travel, minimises the need for private car use and plan for new transport infrastructure to meet needs.” It needs to be a comprehensive plan though, not just a set of unconnected islands of development without the ability to travel sustainably between them.
• The Local Plan aim is to optimise the use of available space in the city to meet the overall aims. Walking and cycling support all the plan objectives, are low-cost, low-carbon, healthy, and use the least space per user compared to most other modes of transport.
• A network of safe, accessible, all age and ability walking and routes will be fundamental to achieving the Local Plan’s objectives. Ideally this should be in place even before the Local Plan comes into effect.
• The Local Plan needs to anticipate and prepare for an increase in electric-powered micro-mobility like eScooters and cargo-bike logistics.

6. Leisure, Culture, and Tourism

• Walking and cycling can be leisure activities as well as transport, with a significant amount of tourist spend relating to these activities.
• The nationally recognised C2C cycle route passes through Newcastle.
• Newcastle is ideally placed to attract visitors wanting outdoor activities given its proximity to the coast and open spaces in Northumberland, as well as more local attractions like the Town Moor and Jesmond Dene.
• Good placemaking, underpinned with high quality walking and cycling links, will also make the city more attractive for visitors.

7. Homes and Communities

• Low-car neighbourhoods can be denser, making it easier to provide better local services and an improved environment. See for example the ‘Merwedekanaal’ proposal from Utrecht.
• Good quality safe walking and cycling routes that children can use to travel independently will also make the city more attractive to families and would help reverse the trend for families to move out of Newcastle.
• Walking and cycling allow residents to benefit from “incidental sociability” improving the social fabric of communities.

8. Attractive and Safe Places

• Walking and cycling contribute to many of the ten characteristics of a well-designed place referenced in the consultation, including: efficient, healthy and sustainable, safe, social and inclusive, accessible and easy to move around.
• Road safety is a key factor in whether a place feels safe or not. Engineering measures can cut traffic levels and dangerous driving behaviours.
• Research has shown that Low Traffic Neighbourhoods also reduce non-traffic related crimes.

9. Protected Natural Environment

• Transport is a major cause of environmental degradation from air and noise pollution, carbon emissions, roadkill, and microplastics from tyres that are washed via the drains into local rivers.
• Enabling more people to walk and cycle more often through the creation of a network of safe all age and ability routes would substantially reduce the impact of transport on the local environment.

All this needs to be backed with a plan with SMART objectives, funding identified and an approach to build community support to achieve rapid change. It should not be passive shelf-ware only ever referred to as the starting point in a negotiation with developers.

These objectives should include:

• Pavements and crossings designed to a high standard to ensure they are accessible.
• Creation of a high-quality cycling network suitable for all ages and abilities that connects homes to local destinations and meets national standards.
• Traffic to be routed via the main road network, with local streets used solely for access.
• Targets for street trees and planting.
• Limits on sources of pollution and nuisance from traffic to ensure any new development doesn’t just minimise its impact but improves the situation compared to if that development didn’t happen.
• Targets for what services are available in a local area, ensuring that children will be offered a place at a school within walking distance and that services will be available when people move in.
• High quality standards for all the above that a development must achieve if it is to be approved. This should include a developer contribution to cover the cost of high-quality walking and cycling routes between the development and local services if not provided on site.

The Core Strategy and Urban Core Plan for Gateshead and Newcastle upon Tyne adopted in 2015, included many similar ambitions for sustainable travel, yet ten years on Newcastle is still dominated by vehicle traffic. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been invested in transport in the city, but most of this has been focused on the Western bypass with the effect of increasing traffic, counter to all sustainability objectives, and Newcastle Airport (the least sustainable mode of transport) continues to boast of increased passenger numbers.

Meanwhile, plans to enable more walking and cycling proceed at a glacial pace, if at all. Our local High Street in Gosforth still doesn’t achieve basic safety guidelines despite a full Council vote to this effect and Policy DM10 stating development should “Provide safe, convenient, attractive and continuous pedestrian and cycle links to key local facilities and services.” If the Council won’t stick to its own policy, why should it expect developers to do so?

So, while we support the ambitions, we remain sceptical that the new Local Plan will make much difference. As we said in our response to the Development and Allocations Plan “The Local Plan should not be limited to addressing issues though. It needs to show a city willing to compete internationally, to draw best practice from across the world, from Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Paris, Seville, London and New York, and our twin city Groningen, all of which are investing in the public realm, prioritising sustainable and active travel and investing in (and competing with each other on) liveability and accessibility. If Newcastle is to compete in this arena it needs a strong vision backed by robust policy to deliver that vision.”

We would also like to draw your attention to the following City Council Motions and ask that the draft version of the Local Plan be prepared to be consistent with these.

• Climate Emergency – City Council 3 April 2019
• Greater Focus on Cycling – City Council 2 October 2019
• School No Idling Zones – City Council 5 February 2020
• Use of E-Cargo Bikes – City Council 6 October 2021
• Investment in Roads and Pavements – City Council 12 January 2022
• Promoting Active Travel All Year Round – City Council 12 January 2022
• Gosforth High Street – City Council 2 November 2022
• Pavement Parking – City Council 1 November 2023

Further evidence, e.g. links to research, can be provided on request.

Yours faithfully,

SPACE for Gosforth.

The post Local Plan 2040 – Our response appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

In March 2023, Newcastle City Council announced that it would trial a new layout on Gosforth High Street using an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO), with a consultation to last the first six months of the eighteen month order. This blog is to share SPACE for Gosforth’s response to that consultation.

While the Council made a number of changes, not all of these required a traffic order. The changes included in the ETRO were:

• A new 7am to 7pm bus lane running north-bound from Moor Crescent to Graham Park Road.
• A continuation of the bus lane running north-bound from Elmfield Road to Woodbine Road.
• Double yellow lines on the east (south-bound) side from The Grove to Moorfield.
• Double yellow lines on the west (north-bound) side from Moorfield to The Poplars.
• No loading and unloading between 7am and 7pm on the west (north-bound) side the full length of Gosforth High Street from Moorfield to Salters Road.

The ETRO specified that the bus lanes can be used by Buses, Taxis, Motor Cycles, Pedal Cycles and other (undefined) Authorised Vehicles. The only exemptions given for the no loading / unloading restriction were universal service provider vehicles, Council bin lorries and emergency services.

The main purpose of the measures being consulted on is to increase the speed of vehicles passing through Gosforth High Street by:

• enabling buses, taxis and motorcycles to undertake queuing traffic,
• enabling traffic to overtake stopped buses,
• prevent parked vehicles from blocking one or more traffic lanes.

The decision to prioritise speed over safety means that Gosforth High Street is not a safe pedestrian and cycling environment, despite the Council’s commitment in November 2022 that any new design would be to the “highest possible safety standards for all road users”.

Our suggestion to the Council is that it uses the remaining 12 months of the ETRO to consult on an alternative design that is safe, inclusive and supports Council policy, prioritising safe walking and cycling to get to and move around Gosforth High Street for all ages and abilities. This, rather than prioritising vehicle speeds, would better support Gosforth High Street as a shopping street and a community hub.

Dear sir / madam,

We are writing to OBJECT to the High Street, Gosforth – Experimental Bus Lanes Order and Traffic Regulation Order 2023. GH/P44/1318

Specifically, we wish to object to:

• The Bus Lane northbound (nearside lane) – from Elmfield Road to Woodbine Road. This should be removed and replaced by cycle lanes that meet the Council’s LTN1/20 adopted standard for all ages and abilities to ensure they meet the requirements set out in The Equality Act 2010 (which the current layout does not achieve).
• The Bus Lane northbound (nearside lane) – from 22 metres north of Moor Crescent to Graham Park Road. This should be either removed, or cycle lane defenders added to create a physical barrier between the bus and cycle lanes.

Our grounds for objecting to the ETRO are:

1. The reasons set out in the ETRO have not been achieved
2. The trial layout is not compliant with Newcastle City Council policy
3. The layout contradicts the LCWIP approved by Council Cabinet
4. The layout is not compliant with modern safety standards
5. It is not inclusive, excluding vulnerable and older and younger users of Gosforth High Street.
6. It doesn’t support customers to travel sustainably to Gosforth High Street.
7. It doesn’t achieve the objectives Councillors and Council leaders voted for in the November 2022 Council motion.
8. Safe walking and cycling routes would be a much better use of the space

Please note that we also have no wish to return to the pre-Covid layout either which was no better and would share many of the same issues and, we believe, lead to increased pollution levels similar to those recorded prior to Covid.

We suggest that instead of continuing with the current plan, the Council uses the remaining 12 months of the ETRO to consult on an alternative that is safe, inclusive and supports Council policy. This should prioritise safe walking and cycling to get to and move around Gosforth High Street for all ages and abilities.

Gosforth High Street is only approx 600m, so traffic using a single traffic lane in each direction for this distance will not significantly impact overall travel times. The Council’s previous monitoring has confirmed this to be the case.

“Journey time data, which has been collected over four years, show that there has been minimal impact on the travelling public with the traffic reduced to two lanes through the High Street.” https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/citylife-news/changes-gosforth-high-street-gets-underway

If north-bound journey time is an issue then extending the north-bound bus lane further towards Blue House roundabout or to Broadway roundabout could be better options.

Likewise, unless the Council intends to ban cycling on Gosforth High Street (which we don’t believe is possible) there will be a need to ensure the safety of people who do cycle to, along or across the High Street, and to achieve the LTN1/20 standard that the Council has formally adopted for all Highway Schemes.

In more detail…

1 The reasons given in the TRO have not been achieved

(a) “To avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road and for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising.” This is not achieved as the road layout requires people cycling to share a busy bus lane with heavy traffic. Specifically, it does not achieve the standards set out in LTN1/20. It has also led to vehicles switching between lanes to overtake slower traffic, higher vehicle speeds in the bus lane directly adjacent to the pavement, and an additional safety risk at the Trinity Church crossing due to buses blocking sight of the traffic lights for drivers in the north-bound general traffic lane.

(b) “support the Council’s commitment to improve public transport across the City” We have previously been informed by Council officers that there is little benefit to out-bound bus lanes. They will have little impact on journey-time reliability for most of the day and, even if required, similar journey-time reliability could be achieved with a north-bound bus lane that ends at Graham Park Road.There is also (our observation and reported by our members) practically no enforcement of the bus lane nor any way for the public to report violations of the bus lane.

2 The trial layout is not compliant with Newcastle City Council policy

Newcastle city Council adopted LTN1/20 for Highway Schemes (Oct 2022 cabinet). This scheme is not LTN1/20 compliant.

The reframing transport report restated the Council’s “ambition to introduce a walking, wheeling, and cycling network that connects every school, to every park, to every high street.” The trial layout instead creates community severance due to lack of safe opportunities to cycle across the High Street. This acts as a barrier e.g. for families living west of Gosforth High Street to visit Gosforth Central Park, or families living east of the High Street to get to Archibald First School or Newcastle School for Boys.

Section 11.12 of the Core Strategy states an intention to create ‘sustainable communities, centres and new developments where priority is given to sustainable modes of transport’ setting out the hierarchy of sustainable modes of transport. In the trial layout, the speed of public transport, freight and car traffic has been prioritised over the safety of people cycling, contrary to that hierarchy.

Section 5.1.2 of the Development and Allocations Plan (DAP) states that cycling ‘routes must be legible, inviting, direct, pleasant and easy to use.” This clearly isn’t currently the case on Gosforth High Street.

Section 5.1.5 of the DAP states “An important factor in encouraging people to walk and cycle is ensuring that key local facilities and services, such as shops, schools and public transport are easily accessible on foot and by cycle.” LTN1/20 confirms that bus lanes “do not provide an environment attractive to a wide range of people and should therefore not be regarded as inclusive.”

Appendix 2 of the DAP states that on Secondary Distributor Roads “Pedestrian and cycle movements should be segregated from traffic” and “pedestrian and cycle movement should be controlled by formalised crossing points.” While this is true for pedestrian movement, the same has not been achieved for cycle movement in the current design.

The Council’s commitment to Net Zero will require changes to maximise the use of walking and cycling for short journeys, and support residents to access local shops and services.

NB Moor Road, east of Gosforth High Street could, with some work, be made inviting, pleasant and easy to use, but it would still not be a direct route to the shops, nor would it (a) improve safety for anyone cycling on Gosforth High Street or (b) support movement around Gosforth High Street between shops and services.

The layout also conflicts with approved Council motions Greater Focus on Cycling (October 2019) and Use of eCargo Bikes (October 2021).

3 The layout contradicts the LCWIP approved by Council Cabinet

In the LCWIP, approved by Cabinet June 2021, Gosforth High Street is shown as part of the proposed city’s cycle network.

It also acknowledges that “High levels of vehicle traffic discourage people from using active and sustainable transport (either in terms of people fearing for their safety or because of delays caused to the public transport network).” The current layout will discourage people from cycling to Gosforth High Street, whereas to meet Council policy it should be encouraging more people to visit (to support Gosforth High Street as a District Centre), by more sustainable means (for better health, better access to employment opportunities on the High Street and to cut air pollution and carbon emissions).

4 The layout is not compliant with modern safety standards

The Council’s own plan emailed prior to installation confirms the Council’s understanding that the layout is not LTN1/20 compliant.

Between 7pm and 7am, the bus lane is not in force so offers no protection to anyone cycling.

Between 7am and 7pm, the bus lane is not enforced effectively so can be blocked by parked vehicles, forcing anyone cycling into the general traffic lane.

We are concerned that buses in the inside lane will block drivers’ visibility of the pedestrian crossing lights by Trinity Church. Residents have for years reported many near misses at this location caused by drivers driving through a red light.

5 It is not inclusive, excluding vulnerable and older and younger users of Gosforth High Street.

LTN1/20 states that “Cycling [and walking] should be accessible to people of all ages and abilities. The Equality Act 2010 places a duty on public sector authorities to comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty in carrying out their functions. This includes making reasonable adjustments to the existing built environment to ensure the design of new infrastructure is accessible to all.”

It goes on to say that bus lanes “do not provide an environment attractive to a wide range of people and should therefore not be regarded as inclusive. Some bus lanes also allow taxis and motorcycles to use them [as is the case on Gosforth High Street], which can signifcantly increase traffc flows, thereby acting as a deterrent to cycling while also increasing risk of conflict.” Conflict, in this scenario, could include collisions and / or injuries, most likely to the person or people cycling.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120

Also, it advises that advisory cycle lanes are “not be suitable for all people and will exclude some potential users and/or have safety concerns”.

Users likely to be excluded by the Council’s current design include younger and older users and disabled cyclists.

6 It doesn’t support customers to travel sustainably to Gosforth High Street.

The bus lane doesn’t help customers travelling from east, west or north of Gosforth, where the vast majority of customers will live. Few will arrive from the south by bus because the Town Moor creates a natural barrier, and most people living immediately north of the Town Moor but south of the shopping area are within a 15 minute walk of the High Street so are less likely to use a bus.

The layout has not enabled any additional sustainable transport options compared to previous layouts. Prior to Covid there were 48 buses per hour using the High Street in each direction. This number will not have increased due to the new trial layout. The maximum desired frequency in the Transport North East Bus Service Improvement Plan is one bus every 5-10 minutes or 6-12 per hour in each direction, substantially less than on Gosforth High Street. The plan says to make bus services “more comprehensive, with overprovision on a few corridors reduced to boost provision elsewhere”, suggesting the Council’s strategy is to reduce bus frequency on Gosforth High Street in order to increase coverage elsewhere. To ensure these current bus journeys remain sustainable, some of those journeys will have to be made by walking or cycling in future.

While we do support quicker bus journey times and increased punctuality and reliability, these should not be achieved by putting other road users in greater danger.

More people can get to Gosforth High Street in 15 minutes cycling than by any other sustainable travel mode. Our estimate is that approximately three times more people could get to Gosforth High Street in 15 minutes cycling than can do so by bus, and many of those 15 minute bus journeys could be walked in a similar time. Cycling is the only sustainable transport mode where everyone who lives closer to Gosforth High Street than another District Centre can get to the High Street in under 15 minutes.

The trial layout does not support cycling to Gosforth High Street nor movement within the High Street between shops when people get there.

Two benefits of cycling for the user are speed and ability to carry heavier loads than if walking. These benefits are both lost if people are required to park their cycles away from the shops they want to visit rather than being able to move freely (and safely) between shops.

7 It doesn’t achieve the objectives Councillors and Council leaders voted for in the November 2022 Council motion.

The new layout

• doesn’t improve options for customers to get to or move around the High Street
• doesn’t meet current (let along ‘highest’) safety standards
• hasn’t enabled any new low-carbon travel options
• has done nothing to enhance green infrastructure
• appears to ignore (rather than align with) previous engagement with residents, local Councillors and business owners.

8 Safe walking and cycling routes would be a much better use of the space

Cllr Byrne is quoted in a May 2023 Council news article as saying ‘development of a new cycle lane, new pedestrian crossings, changes to traffic access on a number of side roads and the installation of secure cycle parking facilities’ on Elswick Road is
(a) ‘fantastic news for residents in this area of the city, which is going to benefit from a significant investment to provide high quality and safer cycling and walking routes.’
(b) As well as helping people get to schools, shops and other local facilities, this will also open up opportunities to access jobs and training and will enable more people to enjoy and feel confident about active travel.
(c) “The new cycle lane will also link up with existing routes helping to further extend our cycling network across the city.
(d) ‘We want everyone in Newcastle to be able to choose and benefit from active travel. This leads to better physical and mental health; stronger, connected communities and a better, more sustainable environment for future generations’

These same benefits could be achieved on Gosforth High Street if safe walking and cycling routes are prioritised to get to and move between shops on the High Street. These benefits would be 24/7 unlike time saved on bus journeys which will mostly only occur in the evening peak and even then will make only marginal difference to overall journey times.

Safe cycling routes also support micro-mobility like the Neuron eScooters.

Additionally, the DfT report “The Value of Cycling” found (amongst many other benefits) that:

• Cyclists visit local shops more regularly, spending more than users of most other modes of transport
• Per square metre, cycle parking delivers 5 times higher retail spend than the same area of car parking
• A compact town optimised for walking and cycling can have a “retail density” (spend per square metre) 2.5 times higher than a typical urban centre.
• Public realm improvements, including those that cater for cycling, have been shown to result in increased trade at local businesses; up to 49% in New York City

Value of Cycling report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/509587/value-of-cycling.pdf

Suggested approach

We suggest that instead of continuing with the current plan, the Council uses the remaining 12 months of the ETRO to consult on an alternative that is safe, inclusive and supports Council policy. This should prioritise safe walking and cycling to get to and move around Gosforth High Street.

Some examples of what could be considered include:

• Safe cycling facilities usable by all ages and abilities both along and to the High Street.
• Declutter the pavement and trial removing the black bollards which take up over half a metre of pavement space on each side.
• Reduce pedestrian crossing wait times, and ensure that there is sufficient time for people to cross.
• Pedestrianise side street-ends so people walking along the High Street have priority over turning vehicles in line with the new Highway Code.
• Reduce non-local traffic using streets either side of the High Street to make it safer and more pleasant for people to walk or cycle to Gosforth High Street.
• Look for opportunities to improve the pedestrian environment e.g. for street cafes, planting or benches, including at ends of side streets.
• Extend the 20mph zone north past Gosforth Academy, west past Gosforth Junior Academy and south to the Little Moor.

We included some further ideas in our email of 9 August 2023 [published in our blog Gosforth High Street – Small Changes].

Kind regards,

SPACE for Gosforth

References – SPACE for Gosforth blogs
Gosforth High Street – Safety Concerns
Gosforth High Street has been designed like a bypass rather than a shopping destination
Gosforth High Street – Good Policy, Terrible Plan
We still love Gosforth High Street
Your Streets – Your Views – Gosforth High Street
A Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan for Gosforth

The post Gosforth High Street – our response appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

From November 2020 to January 2021 Transport North East held a consultation on their draft transport plan for the North East up to 2035. This is the SPACE for Gosforth response.

We looked at the plan’s vision and objectives, and we looked at the schemes proposed. The vision talks about carbon reduction, health, reducing inequalities, safer streets and sustainable travel. The schemes include link roads, corridor improvements, capacity upgrades, addressing vehicle pinch points, dual carriageways and junction upgrades. These clearly don’t align.

We fully support the plan objectives, but the schemes need to be re-evaluated to select and expand those that support the objectives and reject those that do not.

Transport North East say they are working to “deliver game-changing transport schemes and initiatives.” and “to greatly improve the lives of everyone living or working in our region.” The current plan won’t do this, but we hope our and other’s feedback will be taken into account to produce a revised plan that will achieve the stated objectives.

Transport for the North East itself provides “strategy, planning and delivery services on behalf of the North East Joint Transport Committee (NEJTC)“, where the committee is made up of the region’s two Combined Authorities (North of Tyne Combined Authority covering Newcastle, North Tyneside and Northumberland, and the North East Combined Authority covering Durham, Gateshead, Sunderland and South Tyneside).

Update 13 March 2021: Transport North East have produced their final plan for approval by local authorities. You can see the final plan and a “You said – we did” document explaining what changes have been made here.

The letter below is our group’s response to the original consultation in January 2021.

Dear Transport North East,

Re: North East Transport Plan Consultation – January 2021

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the North East Transport Plan. It is extremely positive to see The North East Combined Authority and The North of Tyne Combined Authority working together on a single coherent plan for the region.

We welcome and acknowledge the need, as you say, to “deliver profound and lasting improvements that will shape the North East and its people for decades to come.” We are in the midst of a Climate Emergency, a health crisis made worse because of existing high levels of poor health in part caused by inactivity, and scandalously we have still have not met legally-binding targets for air quality that came into force in 2005.

Between 2010 and 2019, 511 people were killed and 6,450 people were seriously injured on the North East’s roads. These are not just statistics, they were mums, dads, children, friends and neighbours. Almost half of those killed or seriously injured on the region’s roads were under 35 years old. Change is needed, and it is needed quickly, by 2025 not by 2035.

“The truth about a region’s aspirations isn’t found in its vision. It’s found in its budget.”

We’ve looked at the plan’s vision and objectives, and we’ve looked at the schemes proposed. The vision talks about carbon reduction, health, reducing inequalities, safer streets and sustainable travel. The schemes include link roads, corridor improvements, capacity upgrades, addressing vehicle pinch points, dual carriageways and junction upgrades. These clearly don’t align.

Carbon reduction, improved health and more sustainable travel all point to less vehicle traffic in future, not more. Building for more traffic while at the same time forecasting less traffic is just throwing money away, and will lead to more emissions and poor health outcomes.

While we acknowledge many of the schemes included do support active travel and public transport, for a region of two million people they could be substantially more ambitious than proposed, and achieve benefits far more quickly if funds weren’t being diverted to expensive schemes to create unneeded additional vehicle capacity.

The vision should define the destination

The plan vision needs to establish and make tangible what the end goal is and start to build towards that, so people understand the destination rather than only seeing individual steps on the journey. This will support both community buy-in to the plan and provide better focus for the initiatives that make up the plan.

It is not hard to envisage what this would look like. As a minimum it would need to include:

• Accessible and inclusive local streets with pavements that are not cluttered or used for parking.
• A defined road network for essential vehicle journeys, with reduced capacity compared to now, as fewer journeys will need a vehicle in future when other better options become available.
• Local roads that are not part of that main-road network that can be used for walking, cycling, socializing and street play, but not for through traffic (low traffic neighbourhoods).
• Junctions designed to prevent high-speed collisions and speed limits set to ensure collisions do not lead to serious injury or death.
• A region-wide network of safe walking and cycling routes to connect homes to shops, schools, parks and other local destinations and which support inclusive cycling and allow children to travel independently.
• An efficient high-frequency bus network with good quality interchanges and integration with walking and cycling routes for longer multi-modal journeys.

These alone would substantially achieve all the plan objectives with money to spare. The question for Transport North East is how quickly it can move to achieve this vision, so that everyone who lives in the North East can start to see and feel the benefits.

Transport North East has work to do to demonstrate this is not a ‘business as usual’ transport plan.

Substantially the objectives in the plan do speak to the serious economic, climate, air quality, health and wellbeing issues that are today caused by road transport, and need to be addressed through changes to the transport system. Good intentions though are not enough to achieve good outcomes.

As we have said, many of the actual schemes proposed are very much business as usual.

We therefore want to challenge Transport North East to come up with a revised set of schemes, including those on the list above, that will demonstrably prove this is not a ‘business as usual’ plan.

To be genuinely transformational, and not just business as usual, the plan should very clearly:

• Enable the five of seven local authorities that have set a target to be carbon neutral by 2030 to achieve that by substantially decarbonizing the transport system by 2030.
• Achieve zero killed and seriously injured on the region’s roads by 2025. (This should be part of the safe, secure network objective, not hidden away on page 33.)
• Create safe networks of routes leading to a step-change increase in walking and cycling for local (< 5 mile) journeys throughout the region.
• Demonstrate that Transport North East and the constituent authorities can act with the necessary pace and urgency to make these happen, with substantial progress by 2025 or sooner.

There’s no such thing as a ‘two minutes late for work emergency’

There is a Climate Emergency. Poor air quality is the largest environmental risk to public health in the UK. Physical inactivity is responsible for one in six UK deaths.

Choosing how the budget is allocated is a moral and political choice. Transport North East can either deliver profound and lasting improvements by prioritising the budget to address transport poverty, health, climate, economy and environment, or it can build more link roads to make driving marginally more attractive for a few years for people who can afford it. Almost certainly it won’t be possible to do both.

Please choose wisely.

We enclose our response to the consultation questions below.

Yours faithfully,

SPACE for Gosforth

www.spaceforgosforth.com

SPACE for Gosforth North East Transport Plan Questionnaire Response

2. Are you responding as an individual or on behalf of an organisation?

We are responding on behalf of the SPACE for Gosforth group, based in Gosforth in Newcastle upon Tyne. SPACE for Gosforth is a residents’ group with the aim of promoting healthy, liveable, accessible and safe neighbourhoods where walking and cycling are safe, practical and attractive travel options for residents of all ages and abilities. We are residents of Gosforth, most of us with families and we walk, cycle, use public transport and drive. SPACE stands for Safe Pedestrian and Cycling Environment.

6. Do we support the Vision Statement: “Moving to a green, healthy, dynamic and thriving North East”

Yes, we support the Vision Statement.

This needs to be brought to life and explained properly so people understand where the plan is, or should be according to the objectives, leading us. For example:

• Accessible and inclusive local streets with pavements that are not cluttered or used for parking.
• A defined road network for essential vehicle journeys, with reduced capacity compared to now, as fewer journeys will need a vehicle in future when other better options become available.
• Local roads that are not part of that main-road network that can be used for walking, cycling, socializing and street play, but not for through traffic (low traffic neighbourhoods).
• Speed limits set to ensure collisions do not lead to serious injury or death, and junctions designed to prevent high-speed collisions.
• A region-wide network of safe walking and cycling routes to connect homes to shops, schools, parks and other local destinations and which support inclusive cycling and allow children to travel independently.
• An efficient high-frequency bus network with good quality interchanges and integration with walking and cycling routes for longer multi-modal journeys

How much do you agree with each of the following objectives?

What do you think are the barriers to achieving each of these objectives?

The following are common barriers and / or risks that are likely to apply to all the objectives. We suggest these are included in a NE Transport Risk log to be tracked along with appropriate mitigations.

Governance and Leadership Risks

• Lack of political leadership and/or lack of alignment between political leaders.
• Lack of urgency to achieve committed timescales e.g. carbon neutral by 2030.
• Focusing on, and getting bogged down in, small incremental changes at the expense of the more widespread changes needed to achieve the objectives.
• Delays due to schemes not being initiated until the overall plan is agreed.
• Lack of clear prioritisation between objectives e.g. air quality limits need by law to be met ‘in the shortest possible timescale’ and the target for five of seven authorities is to be carbon neutral is 2030.
• Poor quality governance that means schemes, especially those that increase vehicle capacity, are implemented even if they don’t meet the NETP objectives.
• Failure to account for the longer-term impact of Covid in reducing demand for transport.
• Weak planning policies that lead to the creation of new car-dependant suburbs with no local facilities.
• Not exploring alternative revenue raising options for traffic demand management such as a workplace parking levy.

Risks relating to the selection of schemes

• Insufficient portion of the overall budget allocated to meet specific objectives.
• Too much focus on ‘encouragement’ rather than making changes to make streets safer to enable people to walk or cycle.
• Inappropriate allocation of the budget to the wrong schemes that either will not support the objectives or prevent budget being allocated to more effective, more strategically aligned, cheaper or quicker to deliver schemes.
• Over-reliance on traffic management changes, which are unlikely to achieve the objectives and risk inducing increasing traffic volumes and adding to pollution and emissions.
• A lack of measures to manage and reduce the demand for private vehicle travel.
• Promotion of headline-grabbing ‘mega-schemes’ that sound impressive but are less effective than using the same budget for a package of smaller measures.
• Continued over-reliance on traditional ‘predict and provide’ planning for new roads that assume increasing traffic levels even though the NETP objectives implicitly require that in future fewer vehicle miles will be driven than now.

Risks relating to Public Engagement

• Failing to make the case for urgent change through lack of, or poor quality public communications.
• Poor quality or overly-long consultations that delay implementation.
• Too much weight given to relatively minor objections, or issues that can be mitigated, compared to the benefits from achieving the plan objectives.
• Mixed messages vs other council policies e.g. free parking offers.

Risks relating to Implementation

• Over-reliance on modelling vs trialling changes.
• Lack of training and expertise within councils and suppliers to make the necessary change to move quickly from traditional vehicle-led design to people-led design of road schemes.

Further barriers and / or risks that apply to specific objectives are set out in the table below.

12. Are there any objectives you would have liked to see which are missing? If so, what are they?

Yes:

Better places – streets as places where we all live, play, socialize, exercise, shop & where people want to live.

13. Do you agree that individual projects will be required to submit Monitoring and Evaluation Plans?

Yes, we agree. The monitoring and evaluation plans need to assess whether schemes support achievement of the NETP objectives.

How much do you agree with the following policy statements?

31. Are there any comments you would like to make on the policy statements?

See table above.

32. Are there any policy statements which you think are missing?

Please see alternative proposals in the table above. In addition we would like to propose:

Active Travel – Streets are easier and safer to navigate for residents or visitors with limited mobility and for residents or visitors with disabilities or conditions for whom travel is a challenge.

Active Travel – There is good walking and cycling access to local community destinations including schools, shops, medical centres, work-places and transport hubs.

Active Travel – Streets are valued as places where people live, meet and socialise, and not just for travelling through.

33. What do you think of the timeline for the delivery of schemes up to 2035?

The pace of change in the plan is massively too slow and risks not achieving set targets especially:

• Achieving air quality legal limits ‘in the shortest possible timescales’.
• Achieving no fatalities or serious injuries on the regions’ road network by 2025.
• Achieving carbon neutral transport by 2030.

34. Are there any schemes which you feel are missing from this timeline? 


Schemes that support these urgent time-bound objectives should be prioritised and delivered early in the plan timescale. These can include:

• Widespread (region-wide) implementation of low traffic neighbourhoods and school streets.
• New main road crossings, in support of new safe walking and cycling networks.
• Narrowing lanes on urban main roads to 3m maximum width for improved safety for all users.
• Trial schemes to reallocate space on main roads to create wider pop-up protected cycle lanes.
• Review of speed limits to meet Vision Zero principles: 20 mph speed limits in cities, 40mph limits on rural minor roads.
• Clear Air Zones where air quality limits are currently not met.
• Using parking charges to manage and limit traffic demand in busy city centres, including workplace parking levies.
• New bus lanes, where space is not needed for walking and cycling facilities.
• Tightening entrances and exits from junctions to prevent vehicles from travelling through those junctions at high speeds, putting other users at risk.
• Better enforcement of traffic offences, including via the use of ANPR cameras.
• Improved winter maintenance of pavements and cycle lanes.
• On-street secure cycle storage (e.g. cycle hoops)
• Definition and implementation of a minimum viable cycle network that connects homes to major destinations and can then be expanded and improved on.
• Creation of a plan for a regional cycle network including traffic-free cycle links between adjacent urban areas e.g. Newcastle to Ponteland, Killingworth or Cramlington.

SPACE for Gosforth has previously submitted evidence-based suggestions for how to reduce carbon emissions to the Newcastle City Council climate change consultation, which can be found here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/evidence-about-climate-change/

SPACE for Gosforth has also completed a literature review to find what type of measures have evidence to show they are effective to reduce air pollution, which can be found here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/air-quality-what-works/

SPACE for Gosforth’s response to the Newcastle City Council Breathe Clean Air consultation, which proposes schemes to address air pollution in Newcastle can be found here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/tag/breathe-clean-air/

We would also like to propose the inclusion of this walking and cycling scheme by Regent Centre in Gosforth: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/regent-centre/

35. Are there any schemes in our programme which you feel should not be included? 


Yes. Building for more traffic while at the same time forecasting less traffic is just throwing money away, and will lead to more emissions and poor health outcomes.

Link roads, corridor improvements, capacity upgrades, addressing vehicle pinch points, dual carriageways and junction upgrades are how we ended up with a climate crisis and illegal levels of air pollution. More of the same won’t address the climate crisis, won’t solve air pollution, won’t make it safer or more attractive to walk or cycle, won’t address transport poverty, and will further decimate local High Streets as people who can drive are incentivised to travel long-distances to out of town shopping centres rather than supporting local shops.

All the schemes that increase vehicle capacity and encourage more driving need to be re-examined to assess whether they will actually support the objectives or if there are better options including the use of traffic demand management to keep roads clear for those that need to drive most.

Schemes that should be re-evaluated and removed if not consistent with the objectives or if better options exist include:

• Schemes for new car parks, access roads and link roads,
• Additional lanes, dual carriageways, bypasses and any scheme that claims to improve ‘flow’,
• Junction changes designed to increase vehicle throughput, and ‘pinch point’ schemes,
• Changes to vehicle capacity made as part of ‘all user improvements’ or ‘strategic corridor improvements’, and
• Relief roads and new vehicle bridges.

36. Are there any other comments you would like to make? 


In our response to the NECA Walking and Cycling survey in 2017 we said the following, which is equally relevant to the NE Transport Plan.

The strategy [Plan] needs to recognise that every journey driven that could have been undertaken by foot or by cycle:

• Increases travelling cost for the person travelling, money that might otherwise have been spent in the local area.
• Adds to the overall cost of road maintenance.
• Worsens air quality and creates risks for other road users.
• Increases carbon emissions.
• Is a lost opportunity for fresh air and exercise.
• Creates additional demand for parking which means less land available for housing and other more productive uses.

Likewise for every neighbourhood designed to prioritise traffic over place we find:

• Children unable to play outside
• Teenagers not able to travel independently
• Older people stuck alone in their home
• And a community weakened through lack of on-street social interaction.
• Local shops and services diminished because of competition from out of town shopping centres.

Whether or not these are part of the thinking for the transport strategy, or part of its aims, these are the real life outcomes. Nor are these just words. Tens of thousands of people die early each year due to poor air quality near roads. Many more die due to other conditions and illnesses related to how we travel. For example “regular cycling cut the risk of death from any cause by 41%, the incidence of cancer by 45% and heart disease by 46%” (https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/cwis2017/)

By prioritising walking and cycling, the NECA Strategic Transport Plan can deal with air pollution, it can reduce social isolation, it can improve choice for how we travel and make neighbourhoods more accessible for those with reduced mobility. It can reduce road injuries and deaths and reduce the fear that people feel when travelling on foot or by cycle. It can enable children’s independence so they can travel to go to school or play outside with their friends. It can enable people to travel to work and make them feel better when they get there. And it can align individual and community-wide incentives to ensure the transport system as a whole is as efficient as possible.

We hope that Transport North East will seize this opportunity and put in place a robust and well-funded plan to address all these issues as a matter of urgency.

For reference, we have previously responded to two NECA consultations and a consultation by Transport for the North.

The 20 year transport manifesto for the North East, in April 2016 – https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/neca-2016/

The July 2017 NECA Walking and Cycling survey – https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/neca-survey-2017/

Transport for the North Strategic Transport Plan April 2018 – https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/tfn_consultation_questions/

The post North East Transport Plan Consultation – January 2021 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Newcastle City Council has published its plans to give more space to customers visiting  Gosforth High Street, to allow remaining shops to open safely and comply with the Government’s physical distancing rules.

This follows a direction from the UK Department of Transport to all UK Local Authorities saying that work should “begin at pace on closing roads to through traffic, installing segregated cycle lanes and widening pavements.”

This is both to enable physical distancing on busy streets such as Gosforth High Street, and to enable walking and cycling as an alternative to driving shorter journeys now that public transport can no longer operate at normal capacity. A video report by the Guardian newspaper estimates that “if 90% of people [in Newcastle] who usually use public transport drive instead that would be an increase of 48% more cars on the road.”  If that isn’t gridlock it would be very close.

The High Street plans are set out in diagrammatic form below and on the Council’s website. The photo at the top of the article is our SPACE for Gosforth mock up of how it might look once initial temporary measures are replaced with something a little bit more permanent.

Key changes are:

1. Wider pavements from Regent Centre to Elmfield Road. As more shops open and more people visit the High Street, this will provide space for queuing, enable people to pass each other, and create more space for families and household groups to walk together.
2. Waiting areas for shoppers queuing to get a bus home or into Newcastle.
3. Protecting the existing cycle lane between Regent Centre and Christon Road, enabling people to cycle all the way from Brunton Lane into Newcastle on protected lanes or (mostly) quiet roads. The Council say there isn’t space for wider pavements and a cycle lane on Gosforth High Street.
4. A new pedestrian crossing between Henry Street and Spital Terrace.
5. Disallowing the left turn from Salters Road towards Regent Centre, in order to create more space on the pavement. We hope this is something the Gosforth Hotel can take advantage of, although we are also concerned this may lead to increased traffic on neighbouring residential streets.
6. Pavements will be designated one-way, according to the Overview page for all five shopping streets although this isn’t mentioned in the page specifically about Gosforth High Street.

You can provide feedback on the proposal now, or wait until it has been implemented. According to the Council’s news article, schemes will be reviewed “three weeks after they are installed, giving local businesses and people time to get used to changes, and to consider whether further changes are needed.”

The Council says that “initially temporary materials such as cones and barriers will be used, with the view to more permanent materials potentially being installed following input from local councillors, residents, businesses and community groups.”

There are substantial advantages to trialling measures before making them permanent, as it allows residents and businesses to see how changes work in practice and quickly resolve any issues that do arise. Feedback from residents and businesses can be provided based on actual experience so the Council can focus on substantive issues, should any arise, rather than having to deal with misunderstandings of what is proposed or what might happen as a result. This also prevents long delays in the consultation process where discussions can end up being skewed towards (not always realistic) worst case scenarios rather than what is actually likely.

What are the Benefits? 

1. Changes are being made quickly to enable remaining businesses to open safely and minimise the risk of transmitting Covid-19. The approach taken using temporary measures enables this, ensuring flexibility to change if issues are found.
2. Creating more space for customers who will spend money in shops, rather than vehicles just passing through. This reallocation of space should help local businesses offset some of the negative consequences of physical distancing rules.
3. Crossing Gosforth High Street will be easier and safer for people on foot because the distance to cross will be much less. This is especially true for those who might take longer to cross due to mobility issues. Currently some drivers go through the pedestrian crossings on red when the lights are obscured by large vehicles in the inside lane.
4. People’s exposure to air pollution will be reduced as wider pavements means people can stand further away from vehicle exhausts. If traffic is restricted then that might also reduce traffic and pollution levels.
5. It should be safer for everyone on the High Street by reducing dangerous over and under-taking manoeuvres, and the narrower carriageway should encourage drivers to stick to the 20mph speed limit.
6. A safer protected cycle lane between Regent Centre and Christon Road will enable more people to cycle safely between the north of the city and the city centre, bypassing Gosforth High Street using the alternative route via Christon Road, Alwinton Terrace and Moor Road.

Points to consider

1. The plans do nothing yet to enable safe cycling to or across Gosforth High Street. Families, anyone who is less confident (i.e. most people), older or younger people will still have difficulty accessing local shops and services by bike. We hope this might be possible in a future iteration once physical distancing rules can be safely relaxed to give a further boost for local businesses.
2. We expect the plans will discourage speeding if the lane widths are not too wide (narrower lanes are safer because traffic drives slower). Extra signing might also be useful e.g. a 20mph sign painted on the road at the entry to the 20mph section.
3. We aren’t convinced a pedestrian one-way system is necessary as in most locations pavements can be made substantially wider than the minimum 4m width that is proposed, and could make visiting the shops harder for people with mobility issues. We would favour trialling this scheme without the one-way system to see first if that works and only introducing it if necessary.
4. Banning the left turn from Salters Road towards Regent Centre creates a risk of more traffic on Henry Street and Regent Road North, which are often busy with children travelling to or from school. This will need to be monitored along with other local roads and further action taken if necessary.
5. Ensuring businesses can continue to receive deliveries. This might require more use of back lanes and changes on side streets to turn short-stay parking into loading bays, and possibly to create additional disabled parking bays. SPACE for Gosforth produced a map of disable parking in 2016 which you can see here.
6. We think these plans will be beneficial for pollution levels as one lane of queuing traffic in the centre of the street is better than two pushed right up against current narrow pavements. Further measures do need to be taken though, in line with Newcastle’s air pollution plan to ensure legal limits are adhered to, in particular to ensure buses are retro-fitted with cleaner engines. You can follow air pollution levels on Gosforth High Street via SPACE for Gosforth’s @AirGosforthHiSt Twitter feed.

Other Plans for Gosforth and Newcastle

On the Safe Gosforth High Street website, the Council mentions further iterations of the scheme could involve additional cycling parking and preventing vehicle movements between the High Street and some side roads. This could create more space for street cafes or other space for businesses to operate outside.

A separate announcement has been made about proposals, which we support, for safer local streets that can more easily be used for walking and cycling, keeping through traffic on the main road network to create low traffic neighbourhoods for the benefit of residents. This includes changes at Salters Bridge, Stoneyhurst Road and Castle Farm Road to restrict vehicle traffic so they can be used safely for walking and cycling.

Changes are also being proposed for West Road in Elswick; Shields Road in Byker; Adelaide Terrace in Elswick; and Chillingham Road in Heaton. You can find out more about these schemes on the Council’s website newcastledistrictshoppingcentres.commonplace.is/.

Gosforth High Street plans should be implemented within the next few weeks.

The post Enabling Businesses to Open Safely on Gosforth High Street appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Trees, people and zero-emission transport.

In April 2019 Newcastle City Council declared a Climate Emergency. This included a pledge to make Newcastle upon Tyne carbon neutral by 2030, taking into account both production and consumption emissions. The inclusion of consumption emissions means that the city’s target includes emissions from the manufacture of goods and services (such as food, clothing or electronic equipment) consumed by people living in the city.

In October 2019 the Council then announced the formation of a Climate Change committee to advise Cabinet and Council on the actions and resources required to meet the 2030 target, and a Net Zero task force to provide technical input to the committee.  The Council will also work with other local authorities to set up a Citizens Assembly made up of residents from across the North of Tyne area.

The Climate Change Committee will publish a report in March 2020, which will set out how the city will meet the net zero target by 2030. This will be informed by the Council’s call for evidence  for how to tackle climate change. 

This blog sets out the SPACE for Gosforth response to that call for evidence, including eight ideas for quick wins that can be implemented immediately. Getting started quickly will be important, not least that by 31 January 2020 when the call for evidence closed the Council had already used up 303 (7%) of the 4,290 days available between 3 April 2019 when the target was set and 31 December 2030.

The post Call for Evidence about climate change – January 2020 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Newcastle City Council have proposed that Blackett Street and parts of New Bridge Street are made into a pedestrian area linking Northumberland Street, Monument and Old Eldon Square. This blog is our response to the Council’s consultation.

The other changes to the City Centre proposed alongside the Blackett Street plan include:

• Buses that previously used Blackett Street will now use the new bus loop (for a map see our response below).
• Revised arrangements for access and deliveries to minimise traffic in the new pedestrian areas.
• A new pedestrian and event space on Ridley Place at the north end of Northumberland Street.
• New / relocated disabled parking and taxi ranks.
• Cycling infrastructure on adjoining junctions.

More details of the proposals and a link to the consultation (which finishes on 31 January 2020) can be found here.

Dear Councillor Ainsley,

Re: Transforming our city

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Council’s proposals relating to Blackett Street and surrounding areas.

We wholeheartedly support the Council’s ambition for Newcastle upon Tyne to be “A place that has cleaner air and puts people first, and where public transport and healthy, active travel, such as cycling, and walking is a choice for everyone.”

Currently air quality on Blackett Street and New Bridge Street is poor; almost double the legal limit for air pollution in 2018. Large numbers of buses dominate the street, putting people at risk, in some cases with tragic consequences. On Blackett Street in February 2019, a gentleman was killed on his mobility scooter just trying to cross the road.

Traffic Injury and Pollution Data for Blackett Street and the surrounding area

Because of the large number of buses, cycling on Blackett Street and New Bridge Street is only currently a choice for the brave and doesn’t support the Council’s policy that “streets and roads should be designed to be safely used by children and those with limited mobility” [City Council October 2019].

Life and health should not be traded for other benefits. People have a right to be able to travel safely, and simple errors shouldn’t lead to someone being seriously injured or killed.

Richard Grainger’s Vision: A “City of Palaces”

Grainger Town has been a place of forward-thinking innovation combined with elegance and beauty for almost 200 hundred years.  Richard Grainger transformed the area from the remains of a medieval and industrial city and created “a City of Palaces; a fairyland of newness, brightness and modern elegance.” (William Howlett 1842) https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/our-city/history-and-heritage

Richard Grainger’s original vision for Grainger Town was for streets and buildings to be “promenaded” around as well as lived in. The 1997-2003 Grainger Town project recognised this by having as one of its aims to create “a high quality pedestrian-priority precinct, encouraging appreciation of the surrounding architecture, and transforming the experience of walking through this area and promoting civic activity.”
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100510223103/http://www.cabe.org.uk/case-studies/grainger-town

Currently, a very large part of the road space on Blackett Street and New Bridge Street is reserved for vehicles with people squashed to either side.

Current vehicle-priority on Blackett Street

The Council now needs to complete the Grainger Town vision by making Blackett Street and Old Eldon Square traffic-free, and it should do so as soon as possible to address Blackett Street’s poor air quality and road safety issues.

Northumberland Street, which is already traffic-free, gives us an idea of what Blackett Street could be like, with much lower levels of pollution, virtually no traffic-related injuries in the last ten years and thriving businesses. The closure in 1998 is evidence that removing vehicle traffic not only works but allows an area to thrive. A generation on and the number of shoppers along Northumberland Street would be impossible to sustain if this street had continued to support two-way vehicle traffic. Complaints that Christmas stalls and rides had restricted the space in Northumberland Street only serve to demonstrate how the pedestrianised area is not only now accepted, but fiercely protected.

No one would suggest now that the city should turn Northumberland Street into a bus station, and in years to come people will wonder why the same was ever allowed on Old Eldon Square.

Blackett Street south frontage – January 2020

Old Eldon Square has the potential to be one of the best locations in the city centre but is currently dirty, noisy and dangerous. Apart from the east side where John Dobson’s original buildings survive, Old Eldon Square is surrounded by dark brown brick walls that make it look like the goods entrance to an out of town shopping centre. Making it traffic-free will allow these blank walls to be brought back to life with new businesses, street cafes and planting, and allow the square to be used for public events without risking the wellbeing of the people attending.

Blackett Street full of people on a summer Saturday

Detail Feedback

As above, we strongly support the removal of traffic from the areas identified in the Council’s plan. The following detail feedback is about proposed changes to transport arrangements.

1.     Buses and Accessibility

We support the concept of the Bus Loop, as set out in Council Policy UC7 adopted in March 2015, and that, as per that policy, this should be “the principal route for buses within the Urban Core to ensure there is good service around and to the edge of the retail area with 
less reliance on the routes that cut across it.”

We note that only one of the three main bus companies that serve Newcastle city centre currently uses bus stops on Blackett Street, and that passengers that use buses provided by the other two companies do not suffer unduly as a result. Blackett Street will be no further from the new bus loop than Northumberland Street is from the current nearest bus stops.

However, it must be acknowledged that passengers arriving by buses that currently stop on Blackett Street will have a variety of destinations and may want to connect to other bus or Metro services. We would therefore encourage the Council to work with bus companies to ensure that passengers have a choice of routes that allow them to access different destinations within the city. This could be achieved through the accessible, and preferably electric-powered, city centre bus shuttle idea we suggested in our response to the Council’s “Breathe” Air Quality consultation. Currently someone transferring from an east-west bus to one heading north would have a six-minute walk from Blackett Street to Haymarket.

Clearly different people will also have different mobility needs and it is important to ensure that Newcastle is accessible as possible for people with disabilities. We would therefore like to see the Shopmobility scheme expanded to better cater for public transport users rather than requiring people to drive and park to access this service. In fact, regardless of the outcome of this consultation we would like to see this idea taken forward. This could be funded by NE1 instead of their free parking offer, which by reducing the incentive to drive would also help reduce congestion and pollution in the city centre.

Not just buses on Blackett Street

In addition to the above we suggest:

1. To avoid delay to public transport, other vehicle traffic on the bus loop should be minimised as far as possible. All non-stopping traffic should be directed to use the Urban Core Distributor ring road, and the busiest sections of the bus loop should be bus-only.
2. For the same reason, the Council should remove non-stopping through-traffic from Percy Street and Mosley Street, both of which are identified in the Council’s Policy map as Public Transport Distributor Roads.
3. Good quality well-lit walking routes should be provided from the bus loop to major city destinations including the RVI, with clear signage to show the way. Footways should be free from obstruction and wide enough for when they are at their busiest. Signalised crossings should prioritise people on foot with short wait times and comfortable crossing times.
4. Maps should be displayed at regular intervals and at bus stops showing walking routes and which bus stops serve which routes.
5. Multiple options for connectivity between bus routes and with the Metro should be provided to passengers have a choice of routes. E.g. someone travelling west to east across the city may wish to change from a bus to a Metro at St James to avoid city centre congestion, or if travelling east to north a change at Haymarket Bus Station would be better rather than the current six-minute walk from Blackett Street.
6. Bus stops should be good quality and provide shelter and seating for waiting passengers.
7. Vehicle speeds should be rigorously monitored to ensure all traffic sticks to the 20mph limit.
8. In the interim, prior to this proposal being implemented, the Council should enforce existing bus-only regulations on Blackett Street and Grey Street.

Newcastle City Centre Bus Loop and Public Transport Distributor Roads

2.     Cycling

In October 2019, City Council agreed a motion on cycling that said that “Cycle and walking routes should be abundantly available especially within a 3-mile radius of the city centre or major transport interchanges.”

This motion acknowledged the clear benefits of cycling for health and life expectancy, the ability to move more people in the same space, reducing the cost of travel for residents and helping to reduce air pollution and green house gas emissions. In addition, many studies have shown how good cycling facilities are good for local businesses.

Government guidance states that Councils should aim for a 400m grid of routes that are safe for all age and ability cycling and allow access to key destinations. 400m is about the same distance as Haymarket Metro to the south end of Northumberland Street. This, along with the Council’s adopted policy, suggests that safe cycling routes should be provided on Blackett Street and on a tight grid of connecting cycling routes throughout the city centre, including in Zone 3 ‘Other areas of the city’.

The Council has previously produced graphics to illustrate what might be possible on Blackett Street.  Traffic-free cycle lanes such as those shown, which are clearly marked and not shared with people walking, have been found to work better for people walking as well as people cycling. To gain the maximum benefit there also need to be safe onward links to the wider city cycle network at both east and west ends and connecting south to Grainger Street and Grey Street.

Newcastle City Council Blackett Street mock-ups from 2017

Living Streets have produced a report about problems with shared walking and cycling routes, and although the report concludes that issues with sharing are less at destinations where there are high numbers of people walking, there is plenty of space to provide separate lanes so sharing is not required.
https://www.livingstreets.org.uk/media/1864/sharing-the-space-report.pdf

The Council motion on cycling also supported the addition of secure cycle parking. This provision should be spread throughout the city centre and the Council should consider family users (multiple bikes of different sizes including children’s bikes, cargo bikes and women’s bike frames) when selecting what types or combinations of racks to use.

We also suggest that the Council propose to local bus companies that they should provide training for their drivers in how to drive around and safely overtake people cycling.
E.g. https://www.bikeradar.com/news/bus-and-lorry-drivers-to-get-cycle-safety-training/

3.     Parking

On-street parking should be minimised within the Urban Core. Where it is provided it should be priced in order to encourage people to use the major car parks and to reduce traffic circulating to look for on-street parking spaces. Best practice suggests that pricing should aim to have at least 20% of on- street spaces free at any given time so that people who need it can easily find a space to park.

We support appropriate placement of disabled parking spaces, including in the city’s major car parks, and would like to encourage the Council to also find ways to better support people with disabilities to walk, cycle or use public transport.

4.     Beyond the Bus Loop – further development

The Council in its consultation documentation states that as a city ‘we’re growing, changing and investing in tomorrow. After all, great cities don’t stand still.’

We would like to suggest that once the changes being consulted on have been approved, the Council convenes a Grainger Town working group made up of major businesses and employers, transport providers, transport user and residents’ groups that support that Council’s ambition for ‘a place that has cleaner air and puts people first, and where public transport and healthy, active travel, such as cycling, and walking is a choice for everyone.‘ and to realise the  ‘City of Palaces’ vision.

Such a group would require a clear terms of reference that sets out how it will support the Council to achieve its policy goals and avoid further delay that might prevent air quality or safety targets being met.

Ideas for this group to look at might include:

• Extending the benefits of clean air and reduced traffic on adjoining streets by for example removing on-street parking on Grey Street and replacing it with extended pavements and greenery.
• Installing water fountains and/or play features for children.
• Walking routes and signage.
• Options for making the city centre more accessible for people with disabilities.
• City centre cycle hire.
• Low carbon last-mile deliveries.
• Installation of electric power for events to replace diesel generators.

Conclusion

Old Eldon Square is a key destination in its own right, and the removal of vehicle traffic creates opportunities for regeneration and more events for the benefit of the city and its residents.

It is also currently an air pollution and road danger ‘hot spot’, but has a high potential to be improved for people walking and for east-west journeys by people cycling who are currently excluded from this area by the high volumes of buses and other traffic.

The Council has been working on these plans since at least November 2017 and the proposed arrangements have been trialled on numerous occasions. The Council should now move quickly to make Blackett Street and New Bridge Street traffic-free well before summer 2020, even if initially with temporary measures, to bring air quality in line with the government directive and to prevent more people being seriously injured or killed.

In 2015, the Newcastle Chronicle published an article stating 23 pedestrians had been killed or injured by buses in the city since 2012.  These concerns are not new and will not go away without the sort of action proposed by the Council for Blackett Street and New Bridge Street.

In the interim the Council should ensure residents and users of Old Eldon Square are aware of the high levels of air pollution and that people should not spend more time than necessary in the area. While we understand why the Council has permitted events in the square in the past, no further licences should be issued until the traffic has been removed. This includes the Screen on the Green.

Yours sincerely,

SPACE for Gosforth
www.spaceforgosforth.com

Traffic-Related Injuries on Blackett Street and New Bridge Street

1.     “Man taken to hospital with chest pains following two-vehicle crash in Newcastle city centre” January 2020
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/man-taken-hospital-chest-pains-17619592

2.     “Man on mobility scooter hit by bus in Newcastle city centre dies in hospital a day later” February 2019
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/man-mobility-scooter-hit-bus-15829419

3.     “Pensioner in hospital after bus crash which brought city centre street to halt” December 2017
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/pensioner-hospital-after-bus-crash-14045173

4.     “Six passengers injured after bus suddenly brakes in Newcastle city centre” October 2016
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/six-passengers-injured-after-bus-11971358

5.     “Newcastle Council reassures pedestrians after 23 are killed or injured by buses since 2012” May 2015 including:

1. April 2014 “Paramedics called to Blackett Street, close to Grey’s Monument, where a woman in her 50s was lying in the road after being hit by a bus. She was taken by ambulance to the city’s Royal Victoria Infirmary, where she was treated for head injuries not thought to be serious”
2. October 2012 “A man in his 20s was struck by the Stagecoach number 63 on New Bridge Street West, at its busy junction with Northumberland Street. He was taken to hospital “to be treated for a sore elbow”
3. September 2012 “An 84-year-old was taken to hospital with head and arm injuries after he was hit trying to cross Blackett Street near to the bottom of Northumberland Street”
4. August 2012 “A man in his 20s was hit as he attempted to cross New Bridge Street West, near the end of Northumberland Street”
   https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/newcastle-council-reassures-pedestrians-after-9201042

6.     “Accident in Newcastle City Centre” October 2013
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/incoming/gallery/accident-in-newcastle-city-centre-6131187

7.     “Another pedestrian hit by bus in Newcastle city centre” October 2013
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/another-pedestrian-hit-bus-newcastle-6130774

8.     “Eighth victim of a bus accident in seven months” February 2013
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/local-news/eighth-victim-bus-accident-seven-1372201

9.     “Man hurt in bus crash” January 2007
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/man-hurt-in-bus-crash-1479757

10.  “Chaos as man injured by bus” October 2003
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/chaos-man-injured-bus-1664547

Other relevant press stories

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/business/business-news/ambitious-plans-transform-newcastle-city-13913379 Ambitious plans to transform Newcastle city centre – November 2017

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/plans-breathe-new-life-newcastle-13933605 November 2017 cabinet approval

“Outside of London, Newcastle’s Northumberland Street is the next most expensive shopping road in the UK, with an annual rent of £1,742 per square metre.” 2004  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3954649.stm

The post Blackett Street appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

The Council are consulting on changes to seven junctions in the west of the city. All of these junctions are within about three miles, or a fifteen minutes cycle ride from Gosforth High Street.

The Council say that these junctions have been identified as “problem junctions that need investment to improve efficiency and journey time reliability, as well as provide greener and more active travel choices and improving road safety.”

Have your say on the Council’s Commonplace website until 6 October 2019.

This text, as well as the junction designs, suggest that ‘efficiency’ and journey time reliability are the key priorities for the Council. By efficiency we believe the Council means more cars rather than more people. If the latter we would expect bus priority to be designed in whereas none of the junctions have this.

We might also expect good quality walking and cycling routes as walking and cycling are both very efficient in terms of energy use and space required, and travel times are far more predictable than driving. For local journeys, cycling is frequently quicker than driving too.

More surprisingly is that the Council are proposing junctions that will increase vehicle usage when it was only five months ago in April 2019 when the Council declared a Climate Emergency. The Council has a target to reduce transport emissions by 16.5 kilotons CO2. Designing big junctions that add emissions will just make that target harder to meet.

Back to the Drawing Board (again)

The council has been urged to 'go back to the drawing board' https://t.co/pG1eNpXz4d

— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) March 14, 2019

So just like for Haddricks Mill, we are urging the Council to go back to the drawing board. Junction designs need updating to ensure they move people efficiently and safely rather than solely focusing on vehicles.

As these are major schemes, we are also asking the Council to update their consultation material so that:

1. Rather than expecting people to work out what changes are proposed, this is explained e.g. addition of new lanes, traffic lights or crossings.
2. The impact (increase or decrease) in vehicle capacity is made explicit.
3. The impact on green house gas emissions is provided for 3-5 years in the future by which time vehicle numbers will have increased to fully use up the new capacity.
4. Questions relating to congestion are removed from the survey, as the changes proposed are unlikely to make any difference to congestion. Road pricing is the only effective way to achieve a significant and lasting reduction in congestion.
5. Example walking and cycling routes through the junction are explicitly shown on the plans. (We couldn’t tell from some of the plans what routes were proposed.)
6. Relevant Council policies are listed (including climate change and air pollution) and how the proposals will support achievement of those policies.

This will allow the public to take an informed view, and to judge the practical impact of the proposals.

Planning Policies

The consultation also suggests that the ‘problems’ with these junctions has been created by new housing developments in the west of the city.

In the Council’s Development and Allocations Plan policy document the first paragraph under Transport and Accessibility is:

“National policy promotes sustainable development which minimises trip generation and journey length, encourages the use of sustainable modes of transport and promotes accessibility for all. Sustainable development also helps reduce the need for people to travel, manages congestion, improves road safety, meets climate change reduction targets, as well as improving people’s health by creating more opportunities for walking and cycling.”

If these new developments have lead to such substantial increases in traffic that seven separate junctions are impacted and need to be completely re-designed, then feedback needs to be provided to the Council Planning department that their planning process has failed and urgent remediation is required.

The Junction Proposals

Two of the junctions are fairly simple T-junctions, the other five are large cross-roads. We have looked for equivalent junctions in the Netherlands to see what might be possible and so you can compare yourself.

Where the junctions increase vehicle capacity, which appears to be the case in all of the proposals, this will most likely lead to more driving and increased green house gas emissions. As we have said, Newcastle CIty Council needs to explain how this is consistent with declaring a climate emergency, and how it will impact their targets to substantially reduce green house gas emissions.

It’s also worth noting given the frequent use of shared space that, as at Haddricks Mill, this is not likely to be effective in encouraging more people to cycle. Protected cycle lanes are much more effective, as well as being widely supported (78% supported safe all age and ability cycle lanes in the SPACE for Gosforth Your-Streets Your-Views survey).

A. A Dutch T-junction

Our first example is from Ijmuiden close to where the ferry from South Shields docks. If you take bikes on the ferry it’s actually the route from the ferry port to the beach. Both roads have two-way cycle lanes, and the cycle lane on the main road continues in a straight line and has priority over the side road. There are no traffic lights or right hand turn lanes.

There aren’t dedicated pavements at these locations because there are very few people walking, but you can walk along the cycle tracks just as you would walk on the road in the UK countryside.

Junction of Kromhoutstraat and Strandweg in Ijmuiden, Netherlands

B. A Large Dutch Intersection

This example is from Utrecht. It’s actually quite hard to find a junction like this in the Netherlands as many roads this size have underpasses so people can walk or cycle straight through without having to cross the traffic.

It does however show quite clearly the cycle routes (in red). The beige next to the cycle routes is the pavement. The cycle routes are quite wide as they are 2-way on both sides of the roads because the road itself is so large.

Junction of Vleutenseweg and Spinozaweg in Utrecht, Netherlands

This is the Google Streetview for the same junction. The routes are coherent, direct, safe, comfortable and attractive, which, according to the UK Government’s Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Guidance, is how local authorities in the UK should be designing road junctions with cycle provision.

The following are the Council’s proposals, proceeded by Google StreetView of the current junction.

1. Brunton Road/Brunton Lane

The new proposals do include new (shared) pavement and pedestrian crossings, but most of the additional roadspace is to increase the vehicle through-put of the junction.   Cycle lanes are shared, and at the junction to the north are interrupted by an entrance to a side road.

2. Ponteland Road/Station Road

The new proposal is to add traffic lights to the junction, most likely to give more priority to traffic coming from the A696 to the south. This will increase traffic and make it more dangerous for people cycling, who have no dedicated facilities at this location.

3. Ponteland Road/Etal Lane

The addition of traffic lights at this junction will make it easier to cross these very busy roads. Having some separated space for cycling is also a small benefit but overall the experience for people walking or cycling at this junction will still be poor. Routes are incoherent and difficult to read jumping from shared space to separate space and back again, are indirect from both the size of the roundabout and the off-set crossings, safety is compromised for people cycling because the routes don’t connect, and overall it doesn’t look to either be comfortable or attractive.

4. Ponteland Road/Harehills Ave

At Harehills Avenue, again there is an incoherent mix of shared and separate walking and cycling routes. It doesn’t even look possible to travel SW to NE by cycle, even though that is probably one of the most likely uses of this junction by people cycling. Neither Harehills Avenue (NE) nor Blakelaw Road (SW) are marked as roads for through traffic on the Council’s policy map  so it is not clear to us why these roads require multiple exit lanes or two stage crossings.

5. Ponteland Road/Springfield Road

This is very similar to the Harehills junction and suffers from most of the same issues, including the lack of a cycle route from the SW to the NE. There is also plenty of space on Springfield Road for separate protected cycle lanes with minimal adjustment to the current road, if people parking are asked to park on the road rather than the pavement as now.

6. Stamfordham Road/Pooley Road

Coming from the east, the cycle way on the south of the road currently almost reaches the junction so it is not clear why this has been removed. Additional crossings on the west and north sides will be beneficial for people walking.

7. Stamfordham Road/Springfield Road

Again, like all the previous junctions, this junction appears to be designed for maximum vehicle throughput with walking and cycling as an add-on. This is a big area and it would certainly be possible to design something more like the Dutch junction we shared at the top of this blog if the Council chose to do so.

Comment by 6 October

You can have your say on the Council’s Commonplace website until 6 October 2019. Contact details for the Council Cabinet members responsible for Transport and for Climate change are available on the Newcastle City Council website.

You might want to consider mentioning:

• The need for better walking and cycling routes that are coherent, direct, safe, comfortable and attractive.
• The need for walking and cycling to be separate rather than shared space.
• More traffic also means more pollution and more risk of injury for vulnerable road users.
• The Council’s commitment to reduce transport-related CO2 emissions.

The post Junctions West of the City – Comments by 6 October 2019 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Our first blog set out our review of the Council’s proposed measures. In our second blog we proposed measures for the city as a whole and in our third blog we proposed measures for the Gosforth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).

In our final blog we respond to the Councils’ questions about future funding and implementing air quality measures. Measures to meet air quality targets will need to be funded by Central Government, but if part of those measures include a toll or clean air charge there is the opportunity to use that money to further improve air quality and transport in the city.

SPACE for Gosforth response to the Council’s Clean Air consultation: Part 4

Priorities for future funding

The Government have stated that surplus money received through charging or tolls must be spent on transport improvements.

The Council has decided a set of criteria for these transport improvements that they should:

1. Improve public health in our area in the shortest possible time;
2. Enable future economic growth and sustain jobs and communities in the region; and
3. Promote a fairer society and not detrimentally impact vulnerable populations.

We support the Council using these objectives to judge and prioritise schemes for future investment.

Walking and cycling schemes would score highly on this basis. Evidence is available that demonstrates investment in good quality walking and cycling facilities would achieve all three objectives and can be implemented quickly. Seville, for example, implemented a good quality traffic-free cycling network in under two years.

The UK Health Alliance has some useful information about how air pollution, inactivity and obesity, all major public health risks, can be tackled by enabling more active travel http://www.ukhealthalliance.org/tackling-obesity-and-air-pollution-on-the-go/

SPACE for Gosforth has already completed a Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) assessment of Gosforth / north Newcastle. Selected extracts are provided in Appendix E, with the full blog here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/lcwip/

A key priority for Gosforth will be to improve walking and cycling access to the Gosforth “Plus” cluster of destinations for the benefit of residents, visitors and businesses operating in the area. That might include the extension of Trinity Square across West Avenue and Ivy Road, potentially with additional planting, a bigger event space, outdoor seating or even play equipment for children.

A similar approach could be taken to other locations where through traffic is no longer allowed both in Gosforth and in the city centre, especially on Grey Street and Blackett Street.

In order to achieve objectives (b) and (c), the cycling network should be usable by children, by businesses e.g. using cargo bikes, by older people or by people with disabilities. The Council need quickly to implement a design standard to avoid the mistakes it is about to make at Haddricks Mill where the proposed routes are slow, inconvenient, create conflict with people walking and require lots of tight turning and starting and stopping.

The SPACE for Gosforth review of how local cycling facilities support inclusive cycling (or not) would be a good starting point for future investment. A similar review for public transport would be beneficial. https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/inclusive-cycling-in-gosforth-the-ok-the-bad-and-the-ugly/

SPACE for Gosforth has also completed its own survey of what people would support to make Gosforth a better place to live and travel locally. Our proposals in section 7 include many of these elements.

Figure 6 – Residents’ priorities for building a better Gosforth

More trees and greenery was a very popular option and we hope more greenery can be incorporated as part of plans to create low-traffic neighbourhoods.

Other ideas for funding, in addition to those listed in figure 6, might include:

• Ensuring cycle routes can be used through the winter, especially when icy
• On-street bicycle lockers where requested by 3-4 households or more
• Routes to and secure cycle parking facilities at major destinations and transport hubs
• Implementing additional ‘school streets’

The SPACE for Gosforth assessment of the Council’s proposed longer-term measures is set out in the table below.

Implementation and Monitoring

Even without the specific ministerial direction issued by the Government, the law is clear that limits must be achieved in the shortest possible timescales. The Council’s planning and project delivery should support that. This means in particular that work needs to start as soon as possible and that the Council should request from government the necessary resources to expedite the implementation of its proposed plan.

D01 Seek early funding from the Government to start work immediately. To save time we suggest where possible that measures are implemented on a temporary basis then adjusted as the actual impact becomes known, rather than relying on further time-consuming and potentially inaccurate modelling. By 07/2019

D02 Convene an Air Quality Executive board chaired by the CEO of Newcastle City Council and attended by senior representatives of North Tyneside and Gateshead that meets monthly to:

• Monitor current progress in implementing the plan and take action to rectify any delays.
• Review the effectiveness of measures and whether e.g. tweaks are required to parking charges or toll fees.
• Identify and mitigate any risks that could prevent air quality limits being met in the shortest possible timescales
• Look for opportunities to bring forward the date of compliance or to reduce exposure more quickly.
• Accept and consider representations from other Council meetings and forums.
• Be accountable for meeting air quality limits in the shortest possible timescales.

The board should publish promptly its minutes, data provided as input to the meeting and any decisions taken.

Input to the meeting should include:

• Project report(s)
• Plan updates
• Risk register
• Updated monthly traffic and air quality data
• Other forms of monitoring e.g. business surveys
• Feedback from the stakeholder forum (see below)
• Reports from the Council’s transport and planning departments

By 08/2019

D03 Appoint a dedicated programme / project lead reporting directly to Newcastle City Council CEO with a mandate to work cross-department By 08/2019

D04 Appoint other dedicated project staff to support the programme / project manager e.g. for communications & behaviour change, project planning & control and risk management By 09/2019

D05 Create a simple compelling vision for what the Council wants to achieve overall covering air quality and related policy matters such as public health, climate change, healthy streets and how we travel. By 10/2019

D06 Implement additional traffic and air quality monitoring on roads where modelling or measurement has suggested air quality is poor or where traffic might divert to. By 10/2019

D07 Convene a quarterly stakeholder workshop including interested residents stakeholder groups, transport operators and business groups to report and seek feedback on progress to date. By 10/2019

D08 Implement a program of air quality monitoring covering the insides of taxis and buses operating in the city centre. Consider providing additional health advice for bus and taxi drivers.
By 11/2019

D09 Ensure Council processes and decisions for planning, transport and in other areas prioritise meeting air quality limits in the shortest possible timescale and reducing exposure as quickly as possible. By 12/2019

D10 Complete a study of transport options to identify areas of the city, which are lacking choice for how to travel. This would take account of where local shops, services and employment sites are located and would include public transport, walking and cycling. This can be used as input to discussions on how to prioritise future funding. As an example, the study might identify that north-south access to Gosforth High Street is well served by buses but there are far fewer services operating east to west. By 03/2020

Vision for the future

Overall, if the Council wants and / or needs residents and businesses to support a transition to less polluting, more sustainable, modes of transport then the Council needs to set out its vision in a simple, clear and compelling way.

The Council needs to own that vision, not blame the Government for ‘making us do it’.
Then the Council needs to implement that vision with determination, confidence and consistency. And above all it needs to act quickly because people are continuing to die from air pollution at a rate of about one a day in Tyneside, and many more are being made ill for the same reason.

If the Council isn’t confident in its vision then it needs to say so and do something about it.

If the Council wants examples from other cities, or evidence of effects or benefits, there is plenty to choose from. If the Council wants evidence for how voters reward politicians for cleaner, healthier, safer streets then there’s plenty of that too.

If the Council wants a transport policy that addresses cancer, heart disease, obesity, inactivity, diabetes, mental health, social isolation, lack of access to work opportunities, road danger, making the city attractive for families, helping older children to travel safely and independently, climate change, poor performing high streets, the answers are broadly the same.

The Council just needs to get on with it.

The post Breathe – Implementation appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

This is the third of four SPACE for Gosforth blogs that together make up our response to the Council’s Clean Air consultation.

Our first blog set out our review of the Council’s proposed measures. In our second blog we proposed measures for the city as a whole and specifically for the City Centre Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).

In this blog we propose specific measures for the Gosforth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) which covers Gosforth High Street, Jesmond Dene Road, Haddricks Mill Road and the Haddricks Mill junction.

Some of the measures described in our second blog for the city as a whole will also reduce air pollution in Gosforth, though we don’t believe these will be sufficient by themselves to meet air quality limits. These include:

• Retrofitting bus engines so they are EURO VI compliant.
• A clean air zone for buses, coaches, taxis and HGVs covering the area between the Tyne in the south and the Metro line in the north.
• High frequency bus route branding, including for Gosforth High Street / the Great North Road.
• Public information and better enforcement of anti-idling laws.

To ensure that limits are met in the shortest possible timescales and exposure is reduced as quickly as possible (the legal requirement) we are proposing further measures specific to Gosforth. To do this we have looked at options that have been shown to reduce pollution and reduce people’s exposure to pollution, as well as providing for better walking and cycling access to the Gosforth High Street shops.

As we said in our review of the Council’s proposals, we do not believe the proposals as presented meet the legal requirement to meet air quality limits and reduce exposure as quickly as possible. The Council has since presented some revised options which delay implementation even further and look even less likely to meet the legal requirement.

As before we have prioritised, where possible, engineering measures rather than charging. Some sort of clean air charge for private vehicles is the most likely alternative to these proposals in Gosforth if these are not accepted.

SPACE for Gosforth response to the Council’s Clean Air consultation: Part 3

Additional measures for the Gosforth AQMA

Air quality exceedances in Gosforth have been limited to Gosforth High Street, Station Road and Killingworth Road, although Station Road and Killingworth Road were under the limit in the second half of 2017 after Killingworth Road closed for road works. Clearly there is a risk now Killingworth Road is due to re-open to traffic that those locations will be over the limit again.

That means we need measures to address air pollution at both locations.

Figure 5 – SPACE for Gosforth proposals for the Gosforth AQMA

As a priority we are asking the Council to revisit its plans for Haddricks Mill, which will encourage additional traffic in the Gosforth / North Newcastle area and provide a poor experience for people walking and cycling. The Government’s UK Air Quality Plan states that there is considerable uncertainty on the real world impacts of measures that ‘optimise traffic flow’. Potentially the current Haddricks Mill plans could increase pollution levels, which is entirely inconsistent with the Council’s legal obligation to reduce air pollution in the shortest possible timescales. Haddricks Mill is a key east-west route for all forms of transport. In light of the need to address air quality, walking, cycling and public transport all need to be prioritised at this location.

For Gosforth High Street we understand the Council’s expectation to be that there will be a knock on benefit from reduced traffic on the Tyne bridges. That may be the case, but there are also plenty of local journeys made that do not cross the Tyne that could quickly use up this extra capacity. To address this we suggest:

• Re-paint Gosforth High Street to be one lane in each direction. This also means traffic can be moved away from the pavement to reduce exposure.
• Use the available space next to the pavements for protected cycle lanes to give an additional option for people to travel to the shops without using their cars.
• At peak times, limit traffic entering the High Street from the south, using traffic lights in a similar manner to that proposed at Haddricks Mill. These lights can also be used to allow buses through.
• Mitigations on parallel residential streets so they are not used to bypass the above measures.
• Expand Trinity Square north and south to use the space no longer used by traffic.
• School streets to help reduce school-run traffic.
• Regular Clean-Air days on Gosforth High Street.
• Reviewing and updating parking charges so it is cheaper to park and ride at the northern edge of Newcastle rather than driving into the city or parking e.g. near Ilford Road or South Gosforth Metro stations.

These measures are described further below.

C01 Urgently revisit the plans for Haddricks Mill to remove the risk of induced traffic and create space for separate walking and cycling facilities. Consider if other mitigation measures are also required, to offset the impact of increased traffic levels once Killingworth Road re-opens to two-way traffic. By 06/2019

C02 Re-line Gosforth High Street up to Regent Centre as a single lane in each direction sited in the middle of the current carriageway to reduce exposure by moving traffic away from the pavement. By 08/2019

C03 Use the space created by (C02) to implement a protected cycle lane so people can travel to the shops and services on Gosforth High Street without using a car. Initially, for speed of implementation, these can be completed with temporary ‘bolt-down’ kerbs to give protection from traffic. Gosforth High Street 10/2019

C04 Change the timings on pedestrian crossings to be more responsive to reduce exposure for people waiting to cross. By 10/2019

C05 Install hedges as barriers where space exists e.g. on Trinity Square / outside Gosforth shopping centre. By 10/2019

C06 Clean Air Saturdays – once a month, close Gosforth High Street between St Nicholas Avenue and Church Road to all traffic except buses. By 10/2019

C07 Reconsider the location of bus stops so they still provide good access to the shops but passengers do not have to wait in the most polluted areas. Also ensure that bus stops are fit for purpose and provide weather protection for waiting passengers. By 01/2020

C08 Use traffic lights at the south end of Gosforth High Street next to the Town Moor to control traffic levels entering the High Street during peak hours, similar to the Council’s Haddricks Mill proposal. Initially, for speed of implementation this might require some manual control. By 01/2020

C09 Make changes to the following roads to prevent through traffic using them as an alternative to the High Street to avoid measure C08: Linden, Moor Road North and South, Ilford Road, Regent Road North/Hedley terrace, Westfield Grove, West Avenue, Ivy Road. The ends of West Avenue and Ivy Road could be combined with Trinity Square to create a much larger public event space. The specific locations have been chosen as far as possible to minimise additional journey time for residents living in those neighbourhoods. By 01/2020

C10 Enable and fund local schools in Gosforth and the north of the city to implement school streets where streets next to schools are closed to through traffic during drop off and pick up times. By 01/2020

C11 Review of parking and parking charges so that when entering by car from the north of the city it is cheapest to park and ride from Great Park, and more expensive to park closer to the city centre. Currently it is cheaper and quicker to park near Ilford Road Metro than to use the Great Park or Regent Centre park and ride facilities. By 01/2020 (Review implemented)

C12 Implement 20mph from the Gosforth Traders roundabout at the south end of Jubilee Road to Haddricks Mill roundabout. By 02/2020

C13 Install traffic-free cycle lanes on Station Road between Saint Nicholas Avenue and Haddricks Mill roundabout. This may need to divert from the main road at the final stretch approaching the roundabout due to lane width. By 03/2020

C14 Install traffic-free cycle lanes on Benton Park Road between Haddricks Mill roundabout and St Mary’s Catholic School and the Benton Park View government site. Initially, for speed of implementation, these can be completed with temporary ‘bolt-down’ kerbs to give protection from traffic. By 03/2020

The post Breathe – In Gosforth appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

This is the second of four SPACE for Gosforth blogs that together make up our response to the Council’s Clean Air consultation.

Our first blog set out our review of the Council’s proposed measures including a charging clean air zone and an alternative approach made up of a lower emission zone where non-compliant vehicles are banned and there are tolls on the city centre bridge.

In this blog we propose measures for the city as a whole and specifically for the City Centre Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).

The approach we have taken is to adapt the Council’s proposals with the aim of reducing exposure to pollution and achieving compliance with limits as quickly as possible. As we said in our review of the Council’s proposals, we do not believe the proposals as presented meet this legal requirement.

We have also prioritised, where possible, engineering measures rather than charging. These are similar to the city of Ghent’s circulation plan, which led to a 20% improvement in air quality and has also been shown to be beneficial for the city’s economy.

Other measures are based on our review of what works to reduce air pollution.

SPACE for Gosforth response to the Council’s Clean Air consultation: Part 2

Re: Achieving compliance with legal limits for nitrogen dioxide

In this response, SPACE for Gosforth has completed a comprehensive review of the Council’s proposals. We propose additional measures, using local knowledge and the best evidence available to us, to assist the Council in meeting its objectives. These measures include:

• A variant of the Council’s proposed LEZ and tolls
• A wider Clean Air Zone covering the area between the Metro line in the north and the Tyne
• Specific measures in the city centre and Gosforth to reduce traffic and enable alternatives
• Measures that can be implemented quickly to reduce exposure prior to the implementation of a CAZ or LEZ
• Suggestions for management of the implementation to make compliance by 2021 the most likely outcome

Where possible we have tried to avoid charging, but also recognise that measures not supported by some sort of restriction or financial incentive are unlikely to be effective.

We believe the SPACE for Gosforth proposals would be likely to achieve compliance by 2021, and would reduce exposure more quickly than the measures proposed by the Council.

SPACE for Gosforth proposals to meet air quality limits

The plans proposed by the Council have a number of issues that need addressing:

1. Not achieving compliance until 2023, where the requirement is to be compliant as soon as possible.
2. Issues relating to the CAZ / LEZ boundary including traffic diverted onto residential streets.
3. Optimism bias in the modelling, in particular in relation to bus, HGV and taxi compliance.
4. Potential adverse consequences as a result of the charge level required for a CAZ D to achieve air quality limits.
5. A risk, for the LEZ scenario, that measures will not meet limits or reduce exposure sufficiently quickly on Gosforth High Street and the Coast Road.
6. A risk that diverted traffic will increase pollution in areas bordering the CAZ / LEZ.
7. Issues with fairness, in that all diesel and petrol vehicles pollute but that the measures don’t reflect that or the level to which they pollute.
8. A lack of measures to reduce exposure quickly in advance of a CAZ or LEZ being implemented.

SPACE for Gosforth wishes to propose measures to address these issues, which we believe could achieve full compliance in 2021. On that basis, we don’t believe it would be lawful for the Council to propose a plan where compliance would only be achieved in 2022 or 2023.

For convenience, we have grouped these measures into those that affect the city as a whole (listed below), those affecting Newcastle City Centre (in section 6) and those affecting the Gosforth AQMA (in section 7). We have selected measures as far as possible based on our review of evidence for what types of measure will be effective (see Appendix B).

Many of the measures can be implemented very quickly to reduce exposure prior to the compliance date. In section 10 we have set out some proposals for implementation and monitoring. To save time we suggest, where possible, that measures are initially implemented on a temporary basis then adjusted as the actual impact becomes know, rather than relying on further time-consuming and potentially inaccurate modelling.

What we are unable to do, without having the resources available to us that the Council has, is to optimise the plan for cost to meet the Government’s value for money test. So, while we are reasonably confident of the overall effect, it might be possible to achieve the same outcomes for a lower cost.

Measures proposed citywide are as follows. Target dates are estimates based on what we have seen in other cities and are set to be challenging but achievable if the Council and Government do not introduce any further delays and work to implement measures starts as quickly as possible.

Citywide Measures and Target dates for completion

A01 Public information about and better enforcement of anti- idling laws. Share messages about air quality via variable message signs to encourage people to walk, cycle or take public transport. By 09/2019

A02 High frequency bus route branding introduced to be similar to the Metro as a way of attracting new people to use the bus. To apply to routes with 5 or 10 minute frequency.  By 11/2019

A03 Implement emissions-based charging for use of the Haymarket bus station in advance of A06 below. By 01/2020

A04 Implement a taxi exemption scheme that give registered taxis access to through routes in the city centre where drivers have given a commitment to no idling, have completed low-emission driving training and support air quality monitoring set out in measure D08. Such a scheme could also include commitments not to exceed speed limits, no pavement parking and cycle awareness training. By 01/2020

A05 Retrofit bus engines to be EURO VI compliant for all buses that pass through the CAZ B in A06 below. This will result in lower emissions per bus.
Our expectation is that this will only be achieved in the shortest possible timescales if Government commits funding. By 08/2020

A06 Implement a CAZ B for buses, coaches, HGVs and taxis with area bounded by The Tyne, the A1, the Metro line and the A19, and also including Garden Village. We believe this is likely to be sufficient alongside other measures proposed but if not the Council could consider making this a CAZ C or CAZ D. By 08/2020

A07 Implement toll charges on the Tyne Bridge, Redheugh Bridge and the Swing Bridge as per the Council’s proposal. Toll prices set to achieve compliance in first full calendar year. By 08/2020

A08 LEZ for buses, coaches, HGVs and taxis but covering the Urban Core (Newcastle city centre and Spital Tongues) rather than the Council’s proposal. By 12/2020

The CAZ B (measure A06) and LEZ (measure A08) areas are shown in Figure 3 below. These areas are defined in accordance with the good practice set out in the Government’s Air Quality Plan (Annex F).

Figure 3 – SPACE for Gosforth proposals for a CAZ B / LEZ

The CAZ B boundary is the smallest area that meets the Government’s criteria for boundaries and includes within it both the Gosforth and city centre AQMAs. Further measures to apply inside the LEZ are set out in section 6 including the removal of through traffic (other than buses and taxis) and the application of a 20mph speed limit.

As well as resolving issues relating to the boundary of the LEZ / CAZ this also mitigates the risk that areas outside the zone will see increased pollution and will help to achieve limits on Gosforth High Street, at Haddricks Mill and along the Coast Road.

The Council’s Strategic Case explains that the ‘Outer’ CAZ, which covered the same area as the CAZ B above plus North Gosforth, Forest Hall, Killingworth and part of Gateshead, was unlikely to lead to air quality compliance by itself. The Council does not explain which areas specifically remained above the limit in its modelling but our expectation is that the Tyne bridges and CME were likely to be the main locations because of the high traffic volumes. For that reason we believe bridge tolls will also be required.

In ClientEarth v Secretary of State for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Case No: CO/1508/2016), the Government’s QC explained that charges would be set at a level to ensure compliance. While we are unable to judge what that level should be we can propose a structure that might better reflect the impact on air quality of each vehicle using the bridges.

With this approach, vehicles would have to be registered with the Council’s payment system to receive any of the discounts. The example charges are set so that lower emission vehicles pay less, but also recognising that even electric vehicles are the source of some emissions through brake and tyre wear.

Different charges might apply for HGVs, buses and coaches. For taxis we suggest a small discount for taxis signed up to the exemption scheme described above. Given taxis pollute just as much if not more than a private vehicle we don’t see any reason for a complete exemption.

Additional measures for the City Centre AQMA

The measures set out above address a number of the sources of air pollution in the city centre. Specifically:

• Cleaner buses will help address air pollution in most city centre locations but especially around Percy Street, John Dobson Street, Market Street, New Bridge Street and Grainger Street.
• The bridge tolls will reduce traffic levels on the main roads around the city centre and may reduce traffic heading into the city. That might reappear though in the form of other traffic heading into the city from the north, west or east.
• Cleaner taxis will help, especially around Central Station.

That still leaves a number of locations, including Percy Street and the Central Station where the Council’s modelling said even a £12.50 daily charge on older private vehicles would not achieve air quality limits. Additional measures are therefore required for these locations.

Figure 4 sets out the main measures we are proposing including the introduction of a consistent 20mph speed limit everywhere within the urban core area (marked by the updated LEZ boundary), a 40mph limit on the Central Motorway, removing through-routes for private vehicles and specific abatement including at Haymarket and by Swan House roundabout.

To determine what approach to use, we have considered what types of traffic are present in each location and what priority should be placed on each. For Percy Street, for example, traffic will mainly be a mix of:

• Buses
• Service vehicles and deliveries to Eldon Square
• Private vehicles parking in Eldon Square and Eldon Gardens car park
• Click and collect traffic
• Taxis
• Private cars travelling through north-bound but not stopping
• Cycling

Air quality measures will not be effective if their effect only changes the mix of traffic rather than to reduce overall traffic levels. For example, if through traffic is stopped but is replaced by vehicles queuing to park, that might actually increase pollution levels overall.

We have also drawn out a basic cycle network structure as a starting point that can be built on when future funding becomes available. This is to ensure that cycling into the city is possible via traffic-free routes from all directions, and that it is possible to access destinations around the city once there. Additional routes to Science Central and the west of the city will also need to be provided.

Figure 4 – SPACE for Gosforth proposals for the City Centre AQMA

A large part of the traffic across the city centre is there to visit rather than to pass through. Asking non- stopping traffic to use the ring road instead (Council policy UC9) is not unreasonable and will help reduce traffic levels and pollution inside the ring road. It is also low cost, quick to implement and will reduce traffic queues and potentially create space for wider pavements or cycle facilities.

Measures also need to be considered for visiting traffic, so that it doesn’t grow to take the space vacated by through-traffic. This can be managed through the use of parking restrictions and fees. The right level for parking charges would have to be determined but this is something that can be monitored monthly with tweaks made at relatively short notice to ensure compliance with air quality limits.

Pricing on-street parking to encourage people to use the major car parks can reduce traffic circulating to look for on-street parking spaces. Best practice suggests that pricing should aim to have at least 20% of on- street spaces free at any given time so that people who need it can easily find a space to park.

More details of the SPACE for Gosforth proposals for the city centre are included in the table below. Most urgently we are asking the Council to revisit the Percy Street proposals that are designed to enable large volumes of through traffic, and where people cycling are expected to share the road with cars, buses and lorries.

B01 Pause and review Percy Street plans. Re-plan based on lower vehicle volumes and look for opportunities to improve facilities for active travel (walking and cycling). By 06/2019

B02 Monthly Clean Air Days – Blackett St in 2019 prior to full bus loop implementation (measure B10). By 08/2019

B03 Remove on-street parking on Grey Street. By 09/2019

B04 Ban the use of portable diesel generators within the City Centre AQMA. By 09/2019

B05 Increase parking charges at Eldon Square / Eldon Garden car parks, including Alive After 5, set to a level so there is no queuing and air quality limits are met. By 10/2019

B06 Any remaining on-street parking charges set to target 20% spaces being free at peak times, to reduce circulation looking for spaces. Fees should be higher than for off-street parking to encourage people to use main car parks. By 10/2019

B07 Install hedges to reduce exposure, especially at Haymarket, Central station, the Swan house roundabout and Coast Road. By 10/2019

B08 Remove through traffic from the Urban Core as per Council Policy UC9, with exemptions for buses. Suggested locations are marked on figure 4. By 01/2020

B09 Taxi exemptions from measure B08 for EURO VI compliant taxis that also commit to and comply with a new Taxi Driving quality standard described in measure A04. By 01/2020

B10 Implement the City Centre “bus loop” to remove all traffic from Blackett Street (except cycles). By 01/2020

B11 A new free-to-use city centre low/zero-emission shuttle bus connecting key locations but especially Central Station, Haymarket Bus Station and the RVI. By 01/2020

B12 Implement a taxi ban on Grainger Street. By01/2020

B13 All roads within the Urban Core set to 20mph. By 01/2020

B14 Lower the speed limit on the Central Motorway to 40mph. By 01/2020

B15 Cycling improvements especially to connect with the Tyne Bridge, Quayside and roads west of the city, and to improve access to Central Station. Initially, for speed of implementation, these can be completed with temporary ‘bolt-down’ kerbs to give protection from traffic. By 03/2020

These proposals should be positive for buses, taxis and cycling:

• For buses, less traffic should mean fewer delays in the city centre. Increased parking fees and the bridge tolls also make buses more attractive compared to private vehicles so should encourage greater use.
• Taxis also benefit from reduced traffic in the city centre. In section 6 we set out an idea for an ‘exemption scheme’ for taxis and would suggest that any taxis registered with this scheme would also be able to use new bus gates that enforce the new measures B08. The quid pro quo is that taxis would no longer be able to access Grainger Street in order to improve air quality there.
• Safer better-connected cycle routes will help access major destinations within the city. These will need to be linked to a good quality citywide network so people can make their whole journey in safety.
• People who wish to use private vehicles may in future have to pay a little more for the privilege but in return will get a better experience because it will be easier to find a parking space with shorter queues to enter car parks. The free city centre bus shuttles, similar to those implemented in Manchester, will mean quicker access from car parks to locations across the city rather than having to drive around the city to a car park on the far side. The city environment when they get there will also be improved by having less traffic; not least the air quality will be better.

The post Breathe – In the City appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.