According to the North East Road User Casualties dashboard nine people have been injured on Gosforth High Street between April 2023, when the bus lane trial was introduced, and the end of February 2024. The average for the same period in the previous ten years, 2014 to 2023, was 3.4.
SPACE for Gosforth has been quoted in The Chronicle calling for a rethink and has sent an open letter to Councillor Kemp (Leader of Newcastle City Council) and Councillor Williams (Cabinet Member for a Clean, Connected City), which we have published below.
Councillor Kemp knew before the bus lane was installed that there were safety issues with the Council’s road layout, because SPACE for Gosforth sent him and other Cabinet Members a safety briefing in February 2023. We explained these issues in our blog Gosforth High Street – Safety Concerns.
Council Officers were also very clear that the design that was implemented would not meet LTN1/20 Cycling Design Standards, a standard which Newcastle City Council has formally adopted, and was explicitly mentioned in a Council motion about Gosforth High Street that Councillor Kemp and other Cabinet Members voted for.
Campaigners want to see the route redesigned again after a spike in traffic collisionshttps://t.co/WFzQ7Htmpe
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) April 26, 2024
This is SPACE for Gosforth’s open letter. If you wish to write to Councillor Kemp, Councillor Williams or your own local Councillors about this you can find their contact details on the Council website.
Dear Councillor Kemp and Councillor Williams,
Re: New plea for another Gosforth High Street rethink after ‘dramatic’ jump in injuries
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/new-plea-another-gosforth-high-29062354
We are writing to ask you to expedite the removal of the failed Gosforth High Street bus lane trial.
Since the trial bus lane was installed, the number of people injured in traffic collisions has increased dramatically. From April ’23 to February ’24 there have been nine injuries on the central 20mph section of Gosforth High Street, including four bus passengers. The equivalent average from 2014 to 2023 was 3.4.
We note that other experimental schemes in Jesmond and Heaton have been removed for far less serious concerns. At Jesmond you demonstrated you could act quickly. Given this precedent, you should now act quickly to remove the trial bus lane on Gosforth High Street. Indeed, given your previous actions, it would be hypocritical for you to retain the bus lane any longer than necessary, especially as – unlike in Jesmond and Heaton – people have actually been injured in Gosforth.
If you need further evidence, it is clear the trial has not achieved any of the objectives unanimously agreed by City Council in November 2022.
- It has not supported the development of Gosforth High Street as a thriving local destination.
- It does not meet the Council’s adopted safety standards, in particular LTN1/20 which was called out specifically in the November 2022 City Council motion.
- It has not enabled any additional low-carbon transport options. Cycling remains dangerous, there are no improvements for people walking, and no more buses than prior to the trial.
- It has had minimal impact on traffic levels and is therefore unlikely to have reduced pollution or greenhouse gas emissions.
- It has not enhanced green infrastructure on Gosforth High Street.
- It was developed and implemented without the support of elected representatives and without any meaningful engagement with local residents.
Clearly the ETRO objective “to avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road and for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising” has also not been achieved. Based on the TADU injury data the bus lane has increased danger in the central 20mph section of Gosforth High Street.
Proposed Next Steps
- To prevent further injury, the Council should confirm urgently that the bus lane will be removed and confirm its vision for the High Street as a destination and not a through-route as it is currently laid out.
- The Council should install a temporary safe layout while residents are consulted on next steps. We believe that this needs to be one lane of traffic (maximum) in each direction (a) to achieve required levels of safety and prevent further injuries and (b) as air quality legal limits have only been achieved on Gosforth High Street with one general traffic lane in each direction. Newcastle City Council has also previously confirmed that there was “minimal impact on the travelling public with the traffic reduced to two lanes through the High Street.”
- As set out in the Council motion, the Council should consult with residents on a new layout that meets safety standards and is consistent with the objectives agreed at City Council. This should include proposals promised in March 2023 (but never published) for improving access to and along Gosforth High Street for people walking or cycling. The latter, cycling, has the greatest potential to increase the customer base of Gosforth High Street without requiring extra land for more parking and without increasing pollution or greenhouse gas emissions.
- Lastly, there needs to be an investigation into how this was allowed to happen. Why were (a) Officer advice that the trial layout did not meet design standards and (b) the City Council motion asking for Gosforth High Street to be “designed to the highest possible safety standards” both ignored?
Councillors have unanimously agreed the objectives. We know funding is available. This was confirmed by the Assistant Director for Transport at the recent Gosforth Ward meeting and your own Manifesto refers to £7.7m Active Travel funding for Newcastle. All that is needed is for you to make a decision. We urge you to do so quickly.
We have also published this email on our website www.spaceforgosforth.com
Yours faithfully,
SPACE for Gosforth
Bus lane debate
SPACE has taken a very hard stance against the local bus lanes, wholly blaming them for an increase in road injuries. Yet the accidents in the relevant post listed have no definite link to the bus lane. Bus occupants might be injured for many reasons, not least sudden braking. The overall increase might also be linked to just more road vehicles. The number of injuries was probably well down for part of the former period because of the impact of Covid, with fewer people out and about. Post-lockdown, many people have seemed reluctant to return to bus travel, using cars instead. Of late, there has been a drift back to the ‘office’, instead of working at home. This too might have added to the volume of traffic, thereby possibly increasing the likelihood of accidents.
However, it is not clear how SPACE arrived at a collective position on the issue of bus lanes. Nor is it certain that the proposed consultations would actually involve many residents. Usually they only engage small minorities. There is seldom a ‘community view’ anyway and, usually, there are many viewpoints, some quite incompatible.
The sustainable common good is not necessarily just the sum total of individual opinions anyway. We need objective criteria for sustainable transport management. There is plenty of hard evidence of the benefits of bus lanes (eg https://www.cpt-uk.org/media/fe0ebaaj/bus-priority.pdf ; https://www.cpt-uk.org/media/rexlokpe/ttbusreport_digital-final-with-changes-1.pdf ; and https://www.urbantransportgroup.org/system/files/general-docs/pteg%20bus%20priority%20brochure%20June%202014_FINAL.pdf
As members of SPACE we do not agree that bus lanes have totally failed and, as regular bus users, we think they have been a success insofar as they have made journeys more reliable and faster. As pedestrians who do not cycle, we think the problem for “people walking” is not the bus lanes but the long wait and short crossing times at pedestrian crossings. The reasons why there are “no more buses” also has nothing to do with the bus lanes. It reflects a general crisis in bus services across the whole country.
You also refer to “traffic levels” and claim that bus lanes have not reduced them. The main driver here is the construction of car-dependent suburbs to the north and north-west of Gosforth, not the bus lanes themselves. You further argue that bus lanes have not led to “enhanced green infrastructure. Yet it depends on many measures, from tree planting to ‘green’ roofs and walls. Bus lanes make little difference either way.
We also think, again as pedestrians, that LTNs have been a great success and do not agree with the implication, in the open letter, that SPACE just accepts the termination of recent LTNs in Newcastle. In reality, across the country LTNs have been a great success and, in time, become very popular. There was an excellent seminar at the Farrell Centre recently at which plenty of evidence was provided and which should be on its website now or in the near future.
It is certainly true, as you state, that Gosforth High Street is not a “thriving local destination”. This is indeed partly due to the noise, congestion and pollution caused by its current role as a major transport corridor. But there are also several other causes as well, not least high business property rents and competition from the out-of-town retail ‘big box’ stores as well as on-line retailers.
Perhaps the matter ought to be considered more carefully.
Dear Sandy and Julie,
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. As you have made lots of points I will address them one by one.
1. You said “SPACE has taken a very hard stance against the local bus lanes, wholly blaming them for an increase in road injuries. Yet the accidents in the relevant post listed have no definite link to the bus lane.”
There has been a significant increase in the number of people injured on a very short section of Gosforth High Street. This is exactly the sort of thing you should expect SPACE, or any road safety group, to take a hard stance on. These injuries occurred immediately after the new layout was installed.
2. You said “Bus occupants might be injured for many reasons, not least sudden braking.”
What would have caused more sudden braking if not the new road layout?
3. You said “The overall increase might also be linked to just more road vehicles.”
It isn’t. We checked. In 2023, the average number of vehicles per day was 15,153. This is the second lowest since 2017 (the first year TADU shows on their dashboard).
4. You said “The number of injuries was probably well down for part of the former period because of the impact of Covid, with fewer people out and about.”
Covid was not the reason. The annual average number of injuries for 2010 to 2019 was 4.5.
5. You said “However, it is not clear how SPACE arrived at a collective position on the issue of bus lanes.”
In general we support ‘bus lanes’ but safety should always be a higher priority than vehicle speed. We have argued this consistently since SPACE was formed (at the meeting you attended!).
6. You said “Nor is it certain that the proposed consultations would actually involve many residents. Usually they only engage small minorities. There is seldom a ‘community view’ anyway and, usually, there are many viewpoints, some quite incompatible.”
We have asked the Council to make a new proposal in line with the objectives that Councillors voted for unanimously. Generally consultations are open to all to comment so we don’t understand what you mean by ‘small minorities’.
7. You said “There is plenty of hard evidence of the benefits of bus lanes”
This is not disputed.
8. You said “As members of SPACE we do not agree that bus lanes have totally failed and, as regular bus users, we think they have been a success insofar as they have made journeys more reliable and faster.“
Our assertion is that the trial has failed. Objectively it does not achieve the objectives Councillors voted for, and does not meet the Council’s adopted highway design standards.
9. You said “As pedestrians who do not cycle, we think the problem for “people walking” is not the bus lanes but the long wait and short crossing times at pedestrian crossings.”
The trial layout prioritises vehicle speeds. We hope walking will be given greater priority in a future design.
10. You said “The reasons why there are “no more buses” also has nothing to do with the bus lanes. It reflects a general crisis in bus services across the whole country.”
We don’t disagree, but one of the aims Councillors voted for was to enable low-carbon transport options. No additional options were enabled by the trial.
11. You said “You also refer to “traffic levels” and claim that bus lanes have not reduced them. The main driver here is the construction of car-dependent suburbs to the north and north-west of Gosforth, not the bus lanes themselves.”
One of the aims Councillors voted for was to ‘cut pollution and support the city’s ambition to achieve net zero by 2030’. The trial was not successful in this regard.
12. You said “You further argue that bus lanes have not led to “enhanced green infrastructure. Yet it depends on many measures, from tree planting to ‘green’ roofs and walls. Bus lanes make little difference either way.”
Yes, we agree. Again the trial was not successful in achieving the aim of enhancing ‘the green infrastructure on Gosforth High Street’
13. You said “We also think, again as pedestrians, that LTNs have been a great success and do not agree with the implication, in the open letter, that SPACE just accepts the termination of recent LTNs in Newcastle.”
The only reference to LTNs in the letter was to highlight that the Council had removed the LTNs for ‘far less serious concerns’ and to be consistent, given the large number of people injured, the Gosforth High Street should also be removed. As you know, SPACE strongly supports well-evidenced safety approaches like LTNs.
14. You said “It is certainly true, as you state, that Gosforth High Street is not a “thriving local destination”.”
This was another objective agreed by Councillors, also failed.
15. You said “This is indeed partly due to the noise, congestion and pollution caused by its current role as a major transport corridor.”
These are further reasons why the trial layout should be removed, and a new layout created that prioritises Gosforth High Street’s role as a destination rather than a transport corridor.
16. You said “But there are also several other causes as well, not least high business property rents and competition from the out-of-town retail ‘big box’ stores as well as on-line retailers.”
Agree, but the trial layout did nothing to address any of these causes.
17. You said “Perhaps the matter ought to be considered more carefully.”
Agree. This is exactly what we are asking the Council to do, and to investigate why this dangerous layout, that has not achieved any of the objectives Councillors voted for, was installed in the first place.