Gosforth High Street is our most important local destination in Gosforth. We want the shops to be successful and, as we set out in our previous blog, an important part of that is enabling people to get to and move around Gosforth High Street safely. 

The trial design implemented by Newcastle City Council doesn’t even adhere to the most basic safety principle, namely to separate people walking and cycling from heavy, fast moving vehicles. Instead they expect people cycling along or across the High Street to share a lane with buses, or separated only by paint from heavy traffic.

If you want a better, safer, more ambitious, plan for Gosforth High Street, you need to respond to the Council’s consultation ASAP. Please also be clear you don’t want a return to the pre-Covid layout as that was no better!

In this blog we look at safety concerns with the current layout and reveal the alternative safer option rejected by the Council, which we have obtained via a Freedom of Information request.

Issue 1. Forcing people and heavy vehicles to share road-space is not designing to the “highest safety standard for all road users”

In November 2022, Newcastle City Councillors voted for a new design for Gosforth High Street that met the “highest safety standard for all road users”.

If people were happy to cycle in heavy traffic we might see more people cycling on Gosforth High Street. Department for Transport surveys have consistently shown a majority of people (>60%) think it is too dangerous to cycle on the roads due to motor traffic.

In the central section of the High Street there is now a north-bound bus lane and a south-bound advisory lane for cycling.

People cycling are able to use bus lanes but they aren’t designed for that purpose. Department for Transport guidance states 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 fows, thereby acting as a deterrent to cycling while also increasing risk of confict.” Conflict, in this scenario, could include collisions and / or injuries, most likely to the person or people cycling.

The same guidance advises that advisory lanes are “not be suitable for all people and will excluded some potential users and/or have safety concerns” given the volume of traffic, and that “Advisory lanes are not recommended where they are likely to be blocked by parked vehicles.“

Van illegally parked blocking the Gosforth High Street bus lane

The presence of parked vehicles almost doubles the risk to people cycling. 

Designing only for confident and experienced cyclists, as the Council have done on Gosforth High Street, excludes most people who could cycle, especially older and younger people who would be most at risk in a collision. 

Photoshopped picture from the Department for Alternative Transport Blog.

The Council’s proposal implies that people including children, families and older people who wish to cycle to or between shops on the main section of Gosforth High Street should either:

1. cycle in a bus lane or painted cycle lane, without any physical separation or protection from heavy motor traffic; or
2. be prevented from travelling in the way that they wish, counter to the Council’s commitment to inclusive design to be safe for all users as well as its policy of encouraging sustainable travel.

Providing an alternative route on Moor Road is useful for people travelling from north of Gosforth to the city centre. However, this is a diversion away from the High Street, which for many people will be their destination, and neither resolves safety issues on the High Street nor helps travel within or across the High Street.

Issue 2. Close Passes – by design

South of The County, existing painted cycle lanes have been retained. DfT guidelines stated that painted lanes on busy roads “exclude some potential users and/or have safety concerns.” Adding an extra traffic lane makes these even less usable.

Drivers should leave at least 1.5m when overtaking cyclists

Specifically, the new Highway Code requires drivers to leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists. This was just about possible with previous lane widths south of Elmfield Road, but is now much harder with an extra vehicle lane squeezed in – as the diagram below shows.

Streetmix.net mock up of High Street lane widths before and after,. Cycle lanes have been reduced to 1.5m

Drivers, including bus and taxi drivers, can be prosecuted for close passes within 1.5m. Northumbria Police operate a ‘dash cam submission’ website where people can submit video evidence. Even so, close passes are deeply uncomfortable and potentially dangerous for the person who has been ‘close passed’, and will most likely put off even some experienced cyclists from cycling along Gosforth High Street.

This safety risk could be partially mitigated by having cycle lane ‘defenders’ to physically separate people and vehicle traffic, but the current trial doesn’t include this and lanes would still be non-compliant with standards due to being too narrow.

Issue 3. High Street Crossings

Prior to the wands being installed residents complained regularly that vehicles either ignored or did not see the pedestrian traffic lights by the shopping centre. The picture below from Google StreetView (pre-Covid) shows why this happens.

This can be partially mitigated by moving the stop line back and away from the crossing, though won’t be fully resolved while there are multiple north-bound vehicle lanes.

To make it easier for people to move around Gosforth High Street, pedestrian crossings also need to be set to change quickly once the button has been pressed and allow plenty of time for people to cross.

Issue 4. Severance

The November 2022 Council motion stated the new design should “enable low-carbon options to enable people to travel to, along and across the High Street”. This is to prevent ‘community severance‘, the widely-studied effect where a busy road or other transport infrastructure splits adjacent built-up areas making it harder to travel between the two.

In the trial layout, anyone cycling from east to west or vice versa across Gosforth High Street has to share a lane with heavy traffic as most crossings are offset, and most people are not willing to cycle using offset crossings that require mixing with heavy traffic. Without safe cycle-crossings on Gosforth High Street east-west cycling journeys become much harder as there are only a few places where people can safely cross The Great North Road. If cycling is made harder then people are less likely to travel and/or may drive instead.

Failure to Design to UK Standards

The November 2022 Council motion called for Gosforth High Street to be designed to be safe for all users and in accordance with LTN1/20 standards. LTN1/20 is the safety standard for cycling. 

A design in accordance with LTN1/20 would allow people to cycle to, through and across the High Street, stop outside shops and ride safely between shops e.g. if picking up a bottle of wine at Carruthers and Kent, then getting a takeaway from Gosforth Chippy or the New New Bengal. 

This would enable more people to travel to shop on Gosforth High Street without adding to existing high levels of pollution and congestion, and would make Gosforth High Street itself a more attractive destination by creating a gap between the pavement and heavy traffic. This would also allow some of the black bollards to be removed enabling the full width of the pavements to be used. 

We sent a briefing containing all these points to the Newcastle City Council Cabinet (who in November 2022 all voted for the highest possible safety standards!) on 19 February 2023, a month or so prior to the new layout being implemented..

The Alternative Plan

Newcastle City Council did produce an alternative plan that they didn’t use. This included the extended bus lane up to Hawthorn Road, but with protected cycle lanes through the main section of the High Street.

This wouldn’t have resolved all the issues listed above but would be a substantial improvement on what is there now, allowing both for reliable bus times and greater safety for all road users.

The consultation for the trial bus-priority measures runs until 21 September and you can share your thoughts on the Council’s CommonPlace website. 

Commenting on a new funding for a cycle route on Elswick Road in May, the Council said “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.” We just want the same for Gosforth High Street.

Extract from “Gosforth High Street’s future” – motion approved unanimously by City Council November 2022

Council welcomes proposals to replace the bollards on Gosforth High Street with a permanent scheme developed collaboratively with people in the local area to make Gosforth High Street more people-friendly and improve facilities for active travel and public transport.

…

Council resolves to ask Cabinet to ensure proposals for Gosforth High Street:

• Support the development of Gosforth High Street as a thriving local destination with a diverse range of shops and services.
• Are designed to the highest possible safety standards for both pedestrians and all road users, including LTN1/20* which was recently adopted as the standard by Cabinet.
• Enable low-carbon transport options to enable people travel to, along and across the High Street, cut pollution and support the city’s ambition to achieve net zero by 2030.
• Enhance the green infrastructure on Gosforth High Street, in line with the Council’s commitments on biodiversity and maximising nature-based ways to reduce air pollution.
• Are delivered urgently to achieve these benefits as soon as possible, but not without meaningful engagement with local residents about the options and impacts of various schemes.
  
  

The post Gosforth High Street – Safety Concerns appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Transport North East is currently consulting on its draft Active Travel Strategy to encourage more Active Travel – walking, wheeling and cycling – across the North East. This blog sets out SPACE for Gosforth’s response to that consultation.

Following on from their Making the Right Travel Choice strategy published in Nov 2022, the Active Travel Strategy aims to support this strategy by enabling more active travel journeys.

The Active Travel Strategy has outlined a single specific target to increase short active travel journeys by 45% by 2035. 

Who Are Transport North East?

Transport for the North East provides “strategy, planning and delivery services on behalf of the North East Joint Transport Committee (NEJTC)“.  This 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). It came into being in as part of legislation enacting the North of Tyne Combined Authority and Mayor.

In March 2021 the North East Transport Plan was published, outlining a Vision and set of objectives for the North East and identifying the transport priorities needed to meet those objectives.  The lead policy of the Transport Plan is ‘helping people to make the right travel choice’.  This then led to the Make the Right Travel Choice Strategy.  The North East Active Travel Strategy will help to achieve this aim by ‘enabling more active travel journeys’.

What Does This Target Actually Mean?

To place this target in context, the data detailing the current number, type and length of journeys in the North East comes from the Department for Transport’s annual National Travel Survey.  This target specifically aims to increase the number of journeys under five miles which are walked, wheeled or cycled.  Our understanding is that the dataset that has been used as a baseline for this target is the 2018/2019 given the impact that the coronavirus pandemic had on the sample size of subsequent surveys.

Using this data, active travel choices in the North East currently make up 37% of trips under 5 miles.  An increase of 45% will bring this to 54%, broadly in line with the Active Travel England objective of “50% of trips in England’s towns and cities to be walked, wheeled or cycled by 2030.” and the government’s Second Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy (CWIS2, Jul 2022) which has long-term objectives to “increase the percentage of short journeys in towns and cities that are walked or cycled to 50% in 2030 and to 55% in 2035.”

You can read or listen to the strategy here and comment on the strategy here or by emailing [email protected] until midnight on the 5^th March 2023.

Dear Transport North East

Re: Active Travel Strategy March 2022

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Transport North East draft Active Travel Strategy.

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 https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/about.

We previously responded to Transport North East’s Make the Right Travel Choice consultation in 2022, the North East Transport Plan consultation in 2021 as well as the North East Combined Authority’sWalking and Cycling Survey in 2017.

SPACE for Gosforth supports well-evidenced interventions to enable more people to walk, wheel or cycle more often. Being enabled to travel actively also enables people to access local services and job opportunities, save money and improve their health, which has a wide range of positive impacts both for the individual and the wider economy.

As can be seen by the dates on the consultations to which we have already responded, time is of the essence.  Six years have already passed since the North East combined Authority’s Walking and Cycling Survey.  Given that children who started school six years ago, will have now moved to middle school and will be leaving school in 2031, some urgency to realise the benefits of active travel for this generation is essential.

Summary of Key Points from our response

Objectives The strategy needs to be clear if it is solely to increase active travel journeys or if it is targeting a modal switch from driving to active travel. Targets and actions to be taken should reflect this, and should be based on the best available evidence for what is effective to achieve the desired outcomes.

Other regional planning will need to align to these objectives, e.g. to avoid major road expansion schemes that will create severance, lead to additional journeys by car and consequently more emissions.

Targets We support the target to increase active travel to be 54% of all journeys under 5 miles in the NE, which assumes a corresponding decrease in short vehicle journeys. 

Monitoring “direction of travel” however, is not sufficient and doesn’t support achievement of the 2035 target. Interim targets e.g. 45% by 2026, 50% by 2030, should be added for tracking purposes, along with LA-specific targets for specific initiatives like school streets, low-traffic neighbourhoods and LTN1/20 compliant protected cycle lanes.

The Vision Zero target in the NE Transport Plan should also be included in this strategy.

Governance The context should set out clearly the different roles and responsibilities of Transport North East and Local Authorities in delivering this strategy, and what will happen if interim targets are not met. 

Barriers The strategy needs to recognise that while there are a number of barriers, the main barrier for achieving the desired modal switch relates to safety and that interventions to address this need to be given the highest priority. Other initiatives e.g. cycle hire and behaviour change should be focused where there are safe routes people can use.

Funding The strategy needs to demonstrate clearly that the schemes proposed, and level of funding requested, will ensure delivery of the strategy objectives. Currently there is little in the strategy to provide confidence this is the case.

Detail Comments by section of the draft strategy

Executive Summary

The executive summary needs to include an inspiring and relatable vision for what this strategy will mean for where people live and how they may travel in future. 

We suggest it also covers the points raised in our “summary of key points” above. 

We suggest the statement “This would mean that over half of journeys in the North East would be made by active travel.” is amended to “This would mean that, if there is a corresponding decrease in vehicle journeys, over half of all journeys under five miles in the North East would be made by active travel.”

Section 1. Introduction and Context

We support the inclusion of ‘micromobility’ in the strategy. We consider this inevitable and that Transport North East should be preparing for this now to plan for a comprehensive combined cycling / low-speed micro-mobility network.

Strategy Scope should set out how the corresponding decrease in vehicle travel will be achieved, whether it is part of the active travel strategy or something separate.

The context should also set out the different roles and responsibilities of Transport North East and Local Authorities in delivering this strategy, and confirm the process and steps to be taken by each Local Authority to commit to the strategy once the NE Joint Transport Committee has recommended approval.

Section 2. Benefits of Active Travel

Walking and cycling are highly efficient ways to travel that benefit personal health, allow access to local services and job opportunities, and achieve that without any pollution, carbon emissions.

Additional benefits you may wish to consider include:

• Walking and cycling routes have much greater capacity to move people, goods and services per meter width than private vehicles. 
• Benefits for accessibility and inclusion.
• Benefits for children’s independence.
• Potential to reduce commuting time for parents if children are able to travel independently to school once they begin middle school (Year 5)
• Reduced cost and better value for money compared to large road schemes. 
• Enabling low cost travel for individuals and families
• Increased productivity & fewer sick days at work due to health benefits.
• Increased usage of public transport through enabling cycling to local transport hubs
• Energy security – less reliance on oil imports
• Addressing physical inactivity. A British Heart Foundation Physical Activity Report in 2017 identified that 42% of adults in the North East are classed as being inactive. 
• Increased community cohesion.

Further information and links can be found in our 2017 blog “The Case for Healthy Streets” https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/cwis2017/

Some of the benefits outlined in the strategy are related to, and would require a reduction in traffic, rather than an increase in walking, cycling and wheeling.  These include

• Reducing carbon emissions, potentially saving around 80,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.
• Improving air quality by reducing pollution from traffic emissions.
• Reducing noise levels as congestion is eased on our road network.
• Saving petrol and diesel car drivers on average approximately £70 per year (based on September 2022 fuel prices).

As is mentioned in a later section, whether or not traffic reduction will be achieved without other interventions restricting traffic is questionable.  Particularly the benefit of reduced carbon emissions is somewhat overshadowed given the traffic schemes identified in the North East Transport Plan.  

For example, National Highways estimate that the proposed A1 dualling from Morpeth to Ellingham alone will result in an additional 1.4 million tonnes of CO2e to be emitted. That is 17.5 years of active travel benefits wiped out on one short section of road alone.

To convince both our leaders and the public that this strategy is valuable, the benefits must be meaningful and directly related to the objectives of the Active Travel strategy.  

Section 3. How do people travel now?

No comments

Section 4. What are the Challenges?

The strategy needs to recognise that while there are a number of barriers, the main barrier for achieving the desired modal switch relates to safety and that interventions to address this need to be given the highest priority.

Other initiatives e.g. cycle hire and behaviour change should only be implemented where there are safe routes people can use.

Another potential challenge is simply political will to implement the changes. Transport North East could this assist by ensuring transport leads and other Councillors are well briefed on best practice for community engagement and case studies of where previous implementations have been effective.

Section 5. Where Do We Want to be?

We believe a more inspiring and relatable picture of the outcomes would be useful in selling this strategy both to the general public, their elected officials and for gaining real political commitment from the members of the Joint Transport Committee and the future North East metro mayor.

Change is not always welcomed, and the implementation of changes to neighbourhoods at a local level as well as the introduction of a number of schemes during the pandemic has been at times controversial.  However, it is also true that on the whole, councils who were bold with the changes that they have implemented have been re-elected, showing a quiet support beneath the headlines and outrage.

An inspirational vision in this section of the strategy is important to ensure it does not simply remain a tick box exercise.  While statements such as “Negative perceptions of active travel will have been addressed through various initiatives such as promotional campaigns” may allow specific commitments that enable you to reach this point to be identified, it is not the most vibrant imagining of the future!

What will streets look and feel like for everyone: young and old, urban and rural?  What opportunities will there be?  What will our towns, cities and villages look like if your commitment statements are met?

Similar to the “Changes You Will Start To See” section in the North East Transport plan, this section would be enhanced by a more vivid description of what positive day to day differences we will notice should the strategy be successful.

Section 6. Measures of Success

“We propose to monitor success against our vision by… (the) available National Travel Survey (NTS) data to monitor our progress and understand relevant travel patterns in our region.”

While the Executive Summary highlights that “Walking is a good way to increase levels of activity and has the greatest potential to improve public health” the supporting data shows that almost 80% of trips of 1 mile or less are already walked.  While there may be some scope to increase these, the data implies that a great deal of willingness to walk short distances already exists.

For journeys of 1-2 miles or longer, this figure decreases as could be expected simply due to increased time pressures for trips where the purpose is not simply exercise.  The implication, therefore, is that the greater opportunity to convert journeys to active travel is to enable more cycling and micro-mobility.  That is not to say that there is not a great deal to be done to improve the environment for walking, only that those improvements may not be a major contributor to achieving the overarching target.

From the data on which the target is based, if half of a 45% increase in active travel trips were from increased cycling this would result in a cycling mode share of ~7%.  From research by Rahul Goel et al it is noted that “In almost all geographies with cycling mode share greater than 7% women made as many cycle trips as men, and sometimes even greater.”

We suggest that when seeking “methods… to give us a greater understanding of active travel in our region and more accurately assess our position against our goals.” that targeting research on the gender distribution in cycling in the region would assist in assessing progress against the target.

We are also concerned that in having a single target based on a quantitative analysis that the majority of effort will be aimed at schemes perceived to support the greatest gains in terms of modal switch.  Without targets or even monitoring for other demographics such as disability, age, ethnic background and income, it will be difficult to ensure the inclusivity of the implementation of the strategy.  While the strategy mentions that “When monitoring the Key Performance

Indicators, we will also, where possible, seek to analyse and monitor inequalities in transport and health”, none of the Transport Plan’s Key Performance Indicators mention inequality, even though one of the five objectives of the Transport Plan is “Overcome inequality and grow our economy.”  “Where possible” is not a sufficient commitment to ensuring the strategy is inclusive.

There needs to be a clear commitment to ensuring that the Active Travel Strategy is inclusive by monitoring inequalities and targeting schemes accordingly.

We believe it is also important to develop a clear picture of the contributions of each Local Authority towards the final target and how that increases over time.  As the strategy explains “According to the 2021 Census, our region has a population of 1.97 million with 79% of people living in urban locations and 21% living in rural locations.”  With the very different geography and challenges of each Local Authority, individual targets would ensure that overall the final target remains achievable.

While the regional overview provided by this strategy is important, it is essential that political leaders across the region commit to specific time-bound targets defined to ensure the strategy is successful. 

Section 7. How Do We Get There?

“The plan sets out a live programme of interventions… All schemes will be subject to more rigorous testing and appraisal and will only be delivered where they have demonstrated, through detailed business case development, that they can appropriately contribute towards the delivery of the objectives.”

While the interventions themselves are positive, there is little in the strategy that gives us confidence that 

1. the combined total of these interventions will achieve the target to increase active travel by 45% 
2. sufficient consideration has been given on how to achieve the necessary pace and urgency to provide safe walking and cycling networks, taking account of the fact that any modal shift will occur over a period of years after delivery of those networks.
3. the level of funding requested is anywhere near sufficient (Greater Manchester estimated £1.5bn would be required for a smaller area).
4. large parts of the funding won’t be diverted to pay for unrelated road changes or to mitigate safety issues created by road building e.g. demolishing the Gateshead flyover, or paying for underpasses or bridges which should be included in road or rail budgets. 

The strategy then states “this programme will be delivered by the constituent authorities and Nexus within the North East”.  This underlines the key role of the commitment of the Local Authorities within the region.  However, many of the interventions identified are large scale and long-term.  Within the Commitment Statements identified, there are a number of relatively quick, repeatable and cheap interventions that can make significant differences to the quality of the walking, wheeling and cycling environment.  These should be supported by specific targets that individual Local Authorities commit to.

For example:

• “We will adopt LTN 1/20 design standards across the region.”
  • Eg: All LAs formally adopt LTN1/20 as standard by the end of 2023 for all road schemes, not just those designated as relating to walking or cycling.
• We will support and work with local partners to increase the number of ‘school streets’ and low traffic neighbourhoods to protect children and improve air quality.
  • 50% primary and first schools have school streets by 2025
• We will support improvements to public spaces to encourage and enable more walking, wheeling and cycling.
  • Removal of non-compliant barriers on walking and cycling infrastructure by 2025 with a clear method of reporting to local authorities.
• A clear approach to how pavement parking will be addressed and how the public can report where pavements are partially or completely blocked by end 2023.
• A plan for cutting wait-times at pedestrian crossings with trial sites implemented by the end of 2024.

Further targets might include:

• Improving rural safety by reducing speed limits on rural roads not part of the strategic transport network to 40mph
• LA objectives in place and initial LCWIPs complete by end 2023 including identified quick wins for walking and cycling e.g. contraflow cycling, some simple modal filters, speed limits, pavement clutter audits, cycle parking etc
• Key local walking/cycling destinations identified in LCWIP including local shopping districts and transport hubs.
• Confirmation that local shopping areas should be designed to the highest standards of safety and accessibility for walking and cycling in line with the motion adopted by Newcastle City Council for Gosforth High Street in November 2022.

The strategy should also better define what the ‘Regional Cycle Network’ is e.g. does it refer to the National Cycle Network, which is great for longer daytime leisure rides but less use for day to day travel, or will it enable local and intra-regional trips serving major housing areas and key destinations? We also suggest an outline plan for this network be completed by March 2024. There is no reason why this should wait to 2029-2035 as set out in the strategy. 

These measures would need to take account of who is responsible and confirm the process for each LA to develop targets in line with the key commitments in the strategy.

These targets can then be tracked against delivery as well as outcomes, for example number of school streets delivered or miles of continuous, protected cycle lane.

We propose that alongside the current long-term programme of interventions that there is developed a series of short-term “quick wins” for implementation by local authorities, with a clear process and timeline for review.  This will both ensure that the foundations of the strategy are secure as well as providing visible short-term changes to maintain public support.

The North East Transport Plan details as part of its Active Travel Strategy “a significant programme of road space reallocation” by 2030 yet this has not been mentioned of explicitly referred to within the Active Travel Strategy other than brief mention within the Commitment Statements of “We will support and work with local partners to increase the number of… low traffic neighbourhoods.”

The recent Making the Right Travel Choice strategy outlined a target to encourage car users to “switch one journey a week to public transport, walking or cycling and for people who don’t have access to a car to continue to travel sustainably.”

Assuming that by “one journey” what is meant is one return journey or two trips*, we would first like to note the current data shows that this strategy will only work firstly if all of those journeys have active travel as their main mode (as defined by the National Travel Survey main mode of a trip is that used for the longest stage of the trip by distance) of and there is a corresponding decrease in car journeys as a proportion of all journeys under 5 miles in the next 12 years.

Nowhere does the strategy explicitly state how traffic will be reduced other than an assumption that people will only switch mode from car to active travel.  While this may occur, it is unlikely to result in fewer overall car journeys as research has shown that people adapt their behaviour according to prevailing road conditions.  One result of quieter, less congested roads means that people may choose to make additional journeys by car that they would not have previously considered.

Given that it is specifically mentioned within the NE Transport Plan, the omission of the “significant programme of road space reallocation” needs to be addressed within the Active Travel strategy.

The other major omission in the Active Travel Strategy is the commitment set out in the NE Transport Plan published March 2021 to “no fatalities or serious injuries on the regions’ road network by 2025.” Given there were 39 deaths and 620 serious injuries recorded on the region’s roads in 2023, this is looking increasingly out of reach. 

Transport North East should take urgent action to address the large number of people killed and seriously injured (KSI) on the region’s roads and, in addition, seek to understand why KSIs haven’t reduced in line with its target to incorporate any lessons learned into future strategies including the active travel strategy.

END of Response

*Making the Right Travel Choice referred to 200 million journeys which is approximately equal to 2 trips per week x 52 weeks of the year x 1.97 million population in the North East.

Manchester 2018: £1.5bn over 10 years – 1000 miles of active travel routes.
NE 2022: £500m over 13 years – bike hire & demolish a flyover.https://t.co/jXyAnLlFJj

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) December 16, 2022

The post North East Active Travel Strategy March 2023 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

The Government is reviewing The Highway Code, in particular “to improve safety for pedestrians, particularly children, older adults and disabled people, cyclists and horse riders.”

As part of this review, between July and October 2020, the Department for Transport asked for views on proposed changes “on overtaking, passing distances, cyclist and pedestrian priority at junctions, opening vehicle doors and responsibility of road users.” This blog sets out SPACE for Gosforth’s response to the consultation.

What is the Highway Code for?

The Highway Code sets out the rules we should all follow when using the road to keep each other safe. In the standard Hierarchy of Hazard Controls it would be categorised as an administrative or process control. Process controls aim to change how people behave. They do not remove hazards, rather they aim to limit or prevent people’s exposure to those hazards.

The diagram below shows how the different types of controls in the hierarchy could be applied to avoid road traffic collisions.

I decided to completely re-draw and augment that great @NIOSH Hierarchy of Controls diagram.

Those guys in Copenhagen did a version awhile back but I wanted one with plainer language, consistent with the way we talk about street safety. pic.twitter.com/TFL1wqsybD

— Qagggy! (@Qagggy) April 23, 2019

From the hierarchy diagram we can see that process controls are not so effective at mitigating risk from hazards. This is why it is important that the Government also aims to reduce danger by reducing traffic levels and by providing good quality facilities for walking and cycling that don’t require vulnerable road users to share with motor traffic.

A good explanation of engineering concepts for road safety can be found in this video titled ‘Systematic Safety: The Principles Behind Vision Zero.’.

As well as aiming to keep people safe, The Highway Code is also used by Courts of Law and by motor insurance companies to attribute responsibility and assess damages when there has been a collision.

The way The Highway Code is written now suggests that we all have equal responsibility for following the code, no matter, for example, whether you happen to be driving a HGV or a 10 year old child walking to school. This makes little sense, as someone driving an HGV could cause substantially more damage than a child on foot. It has also led to a situation where damages awarded to a victim knocked off their bike has those damages reduced if not wearing a helmet, regardless of whether wearing a helmet made a difference to injuries received.

The proposed changes attempt to remedy this by introducing a hierarchy of road users to clarify that “those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility to take care and reduce the danger they pose to others”.

The remainder of this blog gives the Department for Transport’s proposals and SPACE for Gosforth’s response to those proposals. The descriptions of the proposals e.g. in the sections “Hierarchy of road users”, “Rule H1” and “Rule H2: Rule for drivers, motorcyclists, horse riders and cyclists”, are taken from the DfT’s consultation questionnaire.

Hierarchy of road users

The aim of The Highway Code is to promote safety on the road, whilst also supporting a healthy, sustainable and efficient transport system.

Hierarchy of Road Users: The ‘Hierarchy of Road Users’ is a concept which places those road users most at risk in the event of a collision at the top of the hierarchy. The road users most likely to be injured in the event of a collision are pedestrians, in particular children, older adults and disabled people, followed by cyclists, horse riders and motorcyclists. The hierarchy does not remove the need for everyone to behave responsibly. The following H rules clarify this concept

Rule H1

It is important that ALL road users are aware of The Highway Code, are considerate to other road users and understand their responsibility for the safety of others.

Everyone suffers when road collisions occur, whether they are physically injured or not. But those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility to take care and reduce the danger they pose to others. This principle applies most strongly to drivers of large goods and passenger vehicles, followed by vans/minibuses, cars/taxis and motorcycles.

Cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles likewise have a responsibility to reduce danger to pedestrians.

Always remember that the people you encounter may have impaired sight, hearing or mobility, and may not be able to see or hear you.

None of this detracts from the responsibility of all road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety.

SPACE for Gosforth response:

Overall we support the hierarchy of users but wish to suggest some clarifications.

1. It is not reasonable that the most vulnerable, including young children, are required to be fully aware of the Highway Code. Their safety should be prioritised regardless of their capacity to understand or knowledge of the code. Insisting the most vulnerable road users know the Highway Code will make little or no contribution to the safety of others as they are least able to do harm. This, we understand, is the point of having the hierarchy.
2. Those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision should be required to mitigate and minimise the danger they pose to others, not just to reduce it. The word ‘reduce’ is not clear E.g. a driver might ‘reduce’ the danger they pose to others by reducing their speed from 60 to 50mph, but if this was in a 30mph zone this would still present considerable danger to other road users. This also applies to Rule 204.
3. It would be useful in the introduction to clarify that a road user’s responsibility for the safety of others applies at all times and is not conditional on whether the others act in accordance with the Highway Code or not.
4. The final sentence detracts from the concept of hierarchy and makes the rule less clear. This could be replaced with “None of this detracts from the responsibility of all road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders not to obstruct unnecessarily or endanger other road users.”

Rule H2: Rule for drivers, motorcyclists, horse riders and cyclists

At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.

You MUST give way to pedestrians on a zebra crossing, and pedestrians and cyclists on a parallel crossing.

You should give way to pedestrians waiting to cross a zebra crossing, and pedestrians and cyclists waiting to cross a parallel crossing.

Horse riders and horse drawn vehicles should also give way to pedestrians on a zebra crossing, and pedestrians and cyclists on a parallel crossing.

Pedestrians have priority when on a zebra crossing, on a parallel crossing or at light controlled crossings when they have a green signal.

Cyclists should give way to pedestrians on shared use cycle tracks.Only pedestrians may use the pavement. This includes people using wheelchairs and mobility scooters. Pedestrians may use any part of the road and use cycle tracks as well as the pavement, unless there are signs prohibiting pedestrians.

SPACE for Gosforth response:

Re: “Only pedestrians may use the pavement. This includes people using wheelchairs and mobility scooters.”

We agree with the principle that pavements are for pedestrians but suggest the following sentence is clarified in line with ministerial and police guidance for pavement cycling, and to ensure younger children may use the pavement with their parents, as many do now.

That guidance says “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users.” Link to NPCC Guidance

Rule 64 should also be updated to reflect NPCC advice.

We suggest a further clarification to make explicit how this rule applies to pavement parking.

Rule H3: Rule for drivers and motorcyclists

You should not cut across cyclists going ahead when turning into or out of a junction or changing direction or lane, just as you would not turn across the path of another motor vehicle. This applies whether cyclists are using a cycle lane, a cycle track, or riding ahead on the road and you should give way to them.

Do not turn at a junction if to do so would cause the cyclist going straight ahead to stop or swerve, just as you would do with a motor vehicle.

You should stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists if necessary. This includes when cyclists are:

• approaching, passing or moving off from a junction
• moving past or waiting alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic
• travelling around a roundabout

SPACE for Gosforth response:

Given the potential for a collision and serious injury as a result it would be better to use “must” rather than “should” as in:
 “You must not cut across cyclists going ahead when turning into or out of a junction or changing direction or lane, just as you would not turn across the path of another motor vehicle.”

Rules for pedestrians

The Highway Code already advises drivers and riders to give priority to pedestrians who have started to cross the road. The proposed change is to introduce a responsibility for drivers and riders to give way to pedestrians waiting to cross:

• a junction or side road
• at a zebra crossing

For Rule 8 on junctions the proposed new text is:

 “When you are crossing or waiting to cross the road other traffic should give way.”

For Rule 19 on zebra crossings the proposed new text is:

 “Drivers and riders should give way to pedestrians waiting to cross and MUST give way to pedestrians on a zebra crossing.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

SPACE for Gosforth further comments about other changes to the rules for pedestrians

Rule 13 includes the words “Cyclists should respect your safety (see Rule 62) but you should also take care not to obstruct or endanger them unnecessarily.”

These words suggest that it might be necessary to endanger a cyclist.

We don’t believe it should ever be necessary to endanger any other road user.

Rules for cyclists

Rule 63 for cyclists wording: shared spaces

Rule 63 will be amended to provide guidance for cyclists on sharing space. The additional proposed text is:

“Sharing space with pedestrians, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles. When riding in places where sharing with pedestrians, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles is permitted take care when passing pedestrians, especially children, older adults or disabled people. Let them know you are there when necessary e.g. by ringing your bell (it is recommended that a bell is fitted to your bike), or by calling out politely.

Remember that pedestrians may be deaf, blind or partially sighted and that this may not be obvious.

Do not pass pedestrians, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles closely or at high speed, particularly from behind. Remember that horses can be startled if passed without warning. Always be prepared to slow down and stop when necessary.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

Equivalent words should apply in Rule 163 as many rural roads especially do not have pavements and have to be shared by pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and other road users.

Rule 72 for cyclists: road positioning

Rule 72 will be amended to provide guidance on road positioning for cyclists to ensure that they adopt safe cycling behaviours. The additional proposed text is:

”Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.

1. Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations:

• on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely
• in slower-moving traffic move over to the left, if you can do so safely, so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely
• at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you

2. When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5m (metres) away from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads.

SPACE for Gosforth response:

The wording should make clear that cyclists may use any part of the lane they are using. This should not substantially impact other road users ability to overtake as Rule 163 says that other road users should “give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car “

As the Rule 72 is about safety, then the advice in sub-bullet 1 should focus on that aspect specifically. Sub-bullet 2 covers moving left to allow faster vehicles to overtake E.g.

1. Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations:

• on quiet roads or streets
• in slower-moving traffic
• at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you

Rule 73 at junctions

Rule 73 will be amended to provide guidance for cyclists on how to proceed safely at junctions, both with and without separate cyclist facilities. The additional proposed text is:

“Junctions. Some junctions, particularly those with traffic lights, have special cycle facilities, including small cycle traffic lights at eye-level height, which may allow you to move or cross separately from or ahead of other traffic. Use these facilities where they make your journey safer and easier.

At junctions with no separate cyclist facilities, it is recommended that you proceed as if you were driving a motor vehicle (see Rules 170 to 190). Position yourself in the centre of your chosen lane, where you feel able to do this safely, to make yourself as visible as possible and to avoid being overtaken where this would be dangerous. If you do not feel safe to proceed in this way, you may prefer to dismount and wheel your bike across the junction.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

Rule 76 for cyclists: going straight ahead

Rule 76 will be amended to clarify priorities when going straight ahead. The additional proposed text is:

“Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic.

Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road.

Be particularly careful alongside lorries and other long vehicles, as their drivers may find it difficult to see you. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We suggest replacing this:

“Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road.”

with:

“Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. The driver ahead is required by the Highway Code to check before turning but not all drivers will do so.”

and replacing:

“Be particularly careful alongside lorries and other long vehicles, as their drivers may find it difficult to see you. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning.”

with:

“Be particularly careful alongside lorries and other long vehicles. Their drivers are required by the Highway Code to check before turning, but not all drivers will do so. Remember that they may have to move over to the right before turning left, and that their rear wheels may then come very close to the kerb while turning.”

SPACE for Gosforth further comments about other changes to the rules for cyclists

The consultation proposes to “update Rule 59 to state that evidence suggests that wearing a cycle helmet will reduce your risk of sustaining a head injury in certain circumstances”

Any advice included should be consistent with government advice given when travelling by other modes and in other circumstances where a helmet might reduce the risk of sustaining a head injury e.g. playing sports like rugby or golf, using ladders or gardening.

It also needs to reflect and take account of the fact that cycling overall is beneficial for health regardless of helmet use, and that promoting helmet use risks worse health outcomes overall if it leads to fewer people cycling.

Further advice needs to be provided to courts to confirm that an individual’s choice to use a helmet or not does not excuse or diminish the responsibility of other road users not to collide with or injure a cyclist.

Rule 64 needs to be updated to reflect NPCC advice about pavement cycling.

We support British Cycling’s proposal for Rule 66 regarding riding two abreast.
“You should be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in small or large groups. You can ride two abreast and it is often safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you, allowing them to overtake (e.g. by moving into single file) when you feel it is safe to let them do so.”

We also support British Cycling’s proposals for Rules 154 and 213. See: https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/campaigning/article/20201022-Dame-Sarah-Storey-calls-for-clarity-on- riding-two-abreast-0

Rule 67 needs to make clear that the primary responsibility for preventing a cyclist being hit by an opening door lies with the person opening the door.

Rules suggesting that cyclists should dismount should be reviewed to ensure they do not put people with disabilities, who may not be able to dismount, at a substantial disadvantage.

Rule 140: We suggest changing to “You should not park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable, and even then for only as long as necessary.”

Rules for drivers and motorcyclists

General rules, techniques and advice for all drivers and riders

Rule 140 will be amended to provide advice on cycle lanes and cycle tracks, ensuring that drivers and riders know that cyclists have priority and should give way when turning across their path. The additional proposed text is:

“You should give way to any cyclists in a cycle lane, including when they are approaching from behind you – do not cut across them when turning or when changing lane (see Rule H3). Be prepared to stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists before crossing the cycle lane.

Cycle tracks are routes for cyclists that are physically protected or located away from motor traffic, other than where they cross side roads. Cycle tracks may be shared with pedestrians.

You should give way to cyclists approaching or using the cycle track when turning into or out of a junction (see Rule H3). Be prepared to stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists before crossing the cycle track, which may be used by cyclists travelling in both directions.

Bear in mind that cyclists are not obliged to use cycle lanes or cycle tracks.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

Cyclists may also be filtering in slow traffic and the same protections should apply to them whether a lane is present or not.

Given the potential for a collision and serious injury as a result, we suggest “should” is replaced with “must” e.g. “You must give way to cyclists approaching or using the cycle track when turning into or out of a junction”

Using the Road

The ‘Using the road’ chapter in The Highway Code provides guidance and advice on overtaking, manoeuvring at road junctions and roundabouts, and procedures at different types of crossings.

Rule 163 on overtaking will be amended to advise drivers that cyclists may pass on their right or left. It will also provide a guide of safe passing distances and speeds for passing motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles. The additional proposed text is:

“Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left, including at the approach to junctions, but are advised to exercise caution when doing so

[Give motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders] and horse drawn vehicles [at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car(see Rules 211 to 215)]. As a guide:

• leave a minimum distance of 1.5 metres at speeds under 30 mph
• leave a minimum distance of 2.0 metres at speeds over 30 mph
• for a large vehicle, leave a minimum distance of 2.0 metres in all conditions
• pass horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles at speeds under 15 mph and allow at least 2.0 metres space
• allow at least 2.0 metres space where a pedestrian is walking in the road (e.g. where there is no pavement) and you should pass them at low speed
• you should wait behind the motorcyclist, cyclist, horse rider, horse drawn vehicle or pedestrian and not overtake if it is unsafe or not possible to meet these clearances
• take extra care and give more space when overtaking motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders, horse drawn vehicles and pedestrians in bad weather (including high winds) and at night.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

Roads should be safe for use by all ages and abilities. At 30mph, while the chance of death or serious injury is 40% for all adults, for 70 year olds it is closer to 70%.

On that basis, we suggest changing 30 to 20mph in Rule 163.

Source: https://aaafoundation.org/impact-speed-pedestrians-risk-severe-injury-death/

Further guidance should be provided for maximum speeds for passing pedestrians and cyclists, to align with the proposed rule 61 and provide consistent guidance as to what speed is appropriate that would apply to both rules.

Rule 163 should also include similar wording to that proposed in Rule 63 e.g.

“Remember that pedestrians may be deaf, blind or partially sighted and that this may not be obvious.

“Do not pass pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles closely or at high speed, particularly from behind. Remember that horses can be startled if passed without warning. Always be prepared to slow down and stop when necessary.”

Using the road

Rule 186 on signals and position will be amended to advise drivers to give priority to cyclists on roundabouts, and to take care not to cut across a cyclist, horse rider or horse drawn vehicle that may be continuing around the roundabout in the left-hand lane. The additional proposed text is:

“You should give priority to cyclists on the roundabout. They will be travelling more slowly than motorised traffic. Give them plenty of room and do not attempt to overtake them within their lane. Allow them to move across your path as they travel around the roundabout.

Cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles may stay in the left-hand lane when they intend to continue across or around the roundabout. Drivers should take extra care when entering a roundabout to ensure that they do not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles in the left-hand lane, who are continuing around the roundabout.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

Using the road

Rule 195 on zebra crossings will be updated to include reference to parallel crossings and also amended to advise drivers to give way to pedestrians and cyclists waiting to cross at a zebra crossing or parallel crossing. This rule restates guidance in Rule 17 and reinforces Rule H2. The additional proposed text is:

“[Zebra crossings] you should give way to pedestrians waiting to cross

Parallel crossings are similar to zebra crossings, but include a cycle route alongside the black and white stripes.

As you approach a parallel crossing:

• look out for pedestrians or cyclists waiting to cross and slow down or stop
• you should give way to pedestrians or cyclists waiting to cross
• you MUST give way when a pedestrian or cyclist has moved onto a crossing
• allow more time for stopping on wet or icy roads
• do not wave or use your horn to invite pedestrians or cyclists across; this could be dangerous if another vehicle is approaching
• be aware of pedestrians or cyclists approaching from the side of the crossing.

A parallel crossing with a central island is two separate crossings.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

Using the road

There are several other changes within the using the road section (and we recommend reading the chapter before answering). Some of these changes are to update The Highway Code to recognise facilities and practices that are already in use on the highway. Other proposed amendments are to provide guidance on safe behaviour and practices. In summary, some of the changes include, but are not limited to:

• strengthening priority for cyclists
• road positioning at junctions to ensure the safety of cyclists and motorcyclists
• further clarity on behaviour at Advanced Stop Lines
• keeping crossings clear of traffic
• Do you have any further comments about the changes to the rules on using the road?

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

Road users requiring extra care

The chapter on ‘road users requiring extra care’ in The Highway Code provides further advice on proceeding with caution around pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and motorcyclists, as the main vulnerable user groups. It also strengthens the advice in earlier chapters on giving these groups priority in certain circumstances.

Rule 213 will be amended to advise that cyclists may ride in the centre of the lane for their safety. The additional proposed text is:

“On narrow sections of road, at road junctions and in slower-moving traffic, cyclists may sometimes ride in the centre of the lane, rather than towards the side of the road. Allow them to do so for their own safety, to ensure they can see and be seen. Cyclists are also advised to ride at least a door’s width or 0.5m (metres) from parked cars for their own safety.”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

The wording should make clear that cyclists may use any part of the lane they are using. This should not substantially impact other road users ability to overtake as rule 163 says that other road users should “give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car “

Suggestion:

“Cyclists may ride in the centre of the lane, rather than towards the side of the road. Allow them to do so for their own safety, to ensure they can see and be seen. This is particularly important on narrow sections of road, at road junctions and in slower-moving traffic.

“Cyclists are also advised to ride at least a door’s width or 0.5m (metres) from parked cars for their own safety.”

Road users requiring extra care

There are several other changes within the road users requiring extra care section (and we recommend reading the chapter before answering). Some of these changes are to recognise facilities and practices that are already in use on the highway, or to reinforce advice stated in other rules within The Highway Code.

Do you have any further comments about other changes proposed in the chapter on road users requiring extra care?

SPACE for Gosforth response:

To promote safety, traffic should be directed to use main roads where possible as those roads are best designed for higher volumes of traffic.

Suggested addition to Rule 218: Do not drive using roads in Home Zones, Quiet Lanes or residential areas where alternative main road routes are available.

“Each mile driven on a minor urban road, results in 17% more killed or seriously injured pedestrians than a mile driven on an urban A road.” https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/opinion/2018/august/are-route-finding-apps-making-streets-more-dangerous/

People also suffer the effects of traffic because of roadside air pollution.

Further suggested addition to Rule 206: For short journeys, do not drive if other options are available to you, for example walking or cycling.

This also helps to promote safety and a healthy, sustainable and transport system, while acknowledging that while most people will have alternative options to driving, some will not.

Waiting and parking

The main change to the chapter in The Highway Code on ‘waiting and parking’ is the introduction of a new technique, commonly known as the ‘Dutch Reach’, that advises road users to open the door of their vehicle with the hand on the opposite side to the door. The additional proposed text is:

“you should open the door using your hand on the opposite side to the door you are opening, e.g. use your left hand to open a door on your right-hand side. This will make you turn your head to look over your shoulder. You are then more likely to avoid causing injury to cyclists or motorcyclists passing you on the road, or to people on the pavement”

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We agree these changes.

Waiting and parking

The only other change in the section on waiting and parking is to provide advice on good practice when charging an electric vehicle (also Rule 239).

Do you have any further comments about the other change proposed to Rule 239 on waiting and parking?

SPACE for Gosforth response:

No.

Annexes

The annexes to The Highway Code provide useful advice for drivers and riders. We are proposing additional new text to Annex:

• 1 on ‘you and your bicycle’ aims to ensure that riders are comfortable with their bike and associated equipment. The proposed new text will recommend cycle training
• 6 provides useful advice to drivers of motorised vehicles on how to undertake simple maintenance checks to ensure the safety and road worthiness of the vehicle, the proposed new text will recommend daily walkaround checks for commercial vehicles

SPACE for Gosforth response:

No further comments.

Other comments on The Highway Code

Do you have any further comments regarding the proposed amendments to The Highway Code which focus on safety improvements for cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders?

SPACE for Gosforth response:

We wholeheartedly support the updated objectives for the Highway Code to “promote safety on the road, whilst also supporting a healthy, sustainable and efficient transport system.”

We also fully support the proposed hierarchy of road users and the emphasis on responsibility to avoid harm to others, with those that are capable of inflicting the greatest harm having the greatest responsibility to mitigate that risk.

Final comments

Any other comments?

SPACE for Gosforth response:

At least one person is killed every week on the roads in NE England, and three seriously injured every day. While this might be ‘good’ in historical terms, it is still far too many and we support the use of the Highway Code as one tool amongst many to help achieve a Vision Zero objective of no deaths or serious injury.

We should all have the right, however we travel, to expect to arrive safely and not be put at risk through the actions of others.

Likewise, we should all be able to choose how we travel without fear for our safety being a factor in that decision.

As well as updating the Highway Code, priority and appropriate funding is required for:

• Communicating the changes so road users understand their responsibility to avoid harm to others.
• Road policing so, at least for offences where others are put at risk, there is a realistic chance of prosecution.
• Engineering interventions, including pedestrian crossings, protected cycle lanes and low-traffic neighbourhoods, to encourage safe behaviour and enable people to travel safely whatever their chosen mode of transport.

END

Update 30 July 2021

The Government has published it’s response to the consultation here. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-the-highway-code-to-improve-road-safety-for-cyclists-pedestrians-and-horse-riders

A copy of the Government’s Executive Summary is below.

Government response to the review of The Highway Code – Executive summary

The majority of respondents to the consultation were in favour of all the changes proposed, believing that they would improve safety for cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders. They welcomed the timing of the changes as more people embrace alternative modes of transport, with cycling and walking on the increase. Feedback also emphasised the importance of offering greater protection to those road users.

Overall, percentages of those respondents agreeing with the changes ranged from 68% to 96% agree. Statistical analysis suggests that all the changes proposed should therefore be implemented. However, we have carefully considered the disagree comments and note there are some valid points raised that need to be considered. As a result, we will be seeking to introduce all the amendments as outlined in the consultation, but with changes to the text where a significant concern has been identified.

The proposed introduction of the hierarchy of road users on responsibility (new Rule H1) was widely supported with 79% agreeing with its introduction. There were concerns raised, particularly from road haulage and freight companies, that larger vehicles would automatically be held liable in the event of a road collision with a road user higher up the hierarchy. However, the introduction of this rule does not detract from the requirements for everyone to behave responsibly. We will ensure this is clearly recognised and emphasised by amending the text of this rule.

The introduction of new Rule H2 on pedestrian right of way was supported by 75% of respondents, and 89% agreed with the introduction of new Rule H3 on cyclist priority. There were concerns raised that the changes could lead to cyclists and pedestrians taking greater risks when using the roads, believing that the onus for their safety rests with others. We will consider whether any changes are required to these proposals to clarify that cyclists and pedestrians have a responsibility for their own safety, and need to be respectful and considerate of other road users to ensure a culture of safe and effective road use.

The proposed changes to the rules for pedestrians were widely supported overall. The proposed change to give way to pedestrians waiting at a zebra crossing was supported by 95% of respondents, with many already believing that this was already the cultural norm.

More concerns were raised about the proposal to give way to pedestrians waiting at a junction with worries that the proposed change could be confusing and could lead to an increased risk of road collisions. We will review the wording to ensure these concerns are addressed.

There were considerable changes proposed in the rules for cyclists chapter of The Highway Code, but once again respondents were in broad agreement that all the changes should be implemented with percentages ranging from 76% to 91% in agreement with all the changes proposed. Disagree comments mainly reflected on the notion that cyclists would take greater risks due to having priority in certain circumstances. There were also concerns about cyclists passing road traffic on the left. As before, where valid concerns have been identified, we will amend the text to address these points.

Given the large number of changes proposed in the rules for cyclists, there was a considerable amount of feedback to analyse. Of significance were comments on Rule 66 on riding 2 abreast, recognition of disabled cyclists and emphasised safety messaging for cyclists passing to the left of larger vehicles. We will consider the points raised and seek to amend the wording along with educational and awareness campaigns.

In the chapter on using the road, we consulted on the introduction of safe passing distances and speeds. These were widely supported with agreement of over 80% for all the changes proposed. However, there were some concerns that the passing distances were too complex and would benefit from a standard distance (such as 2 metres in all cases) and some disagreement that the speeds proposed were either too fast or too slow. We will review these proposed amendments to consider how we can simplify the wording.

A strong theme in many of the consultation responses was the need to ensure that all road users know about the changes and can act on them. Many respondents highlighted the need for a publicity campaign to raise awareness of the amendments and to achieve the changes in behaviour that will lead to safer roads for all road users.

In conjunction with the consultation, we commissioned research on sharing our roads, including seeking views on some of the proposed changes. This has provided valuable insights on how to effectively communicate the changes. We will be launching an awareness-raising campaign alongside the publication of the updated highway code. And led by THINK!, we will develop behaviour change communications aimed at both motorists and vulnerable road users to support the aims of the review. Research will be used to identify priority audiences for communications to achieve the greatest impact.

Along with asking explicit questions about specific rule changes, the consultation sought general views on the other changes proposed within each chapter of The Highway Code. There have been many valid and helpful comments received. We would like to thank all those who took the time to respond to the questions and to those who provided further views.

However, many of the comments received were out-of-scope of the consultation and general views on the government’s policy position. For example, the consultation did not seek opinions on the use of cycle helmets, insurance, infrastructure improvements, shared space and so on. Many of the issues raised have already been considered in-depth as part of the initial ‘Cycling and walking investment strategy safety review’. We will not be reporting on any feedback we received on those topics which were not within the range of the consultation, but we have noted wider concerns for future policy considerations.

Update 1 December 2021

The Government has published its proposed update to the Highway Code. Details can be found here. If agreed by Parliament, these could come into force from early 2022.

You can read the full outcome of the consultation here.

The significant changes are:

– A hierarchy of road users
– Drivers overtaking people cycling to give at least 1.5m
– Preventing ‘car-dooring’ cyclists by using the Dutch Reach
– Simplification on rules related to non-signalised junctions to prevent “left-hook” collisions

— APPG for Cycling & Walking (@APPGCW) December 1, 2021

This was the response from Cycling UK.

For the last ten years we've been campaigning for a Highway Code update. Today new rules were laid before Parliament. By February we should have a Code which better protects vulnerable road users, including 'hierarchy of responsibility' and Dutch Reach: https://t.co/m9RYyJWfFd pic.twitter.com/fHGLqiTdS9

— Cycling UK (@WeAreCyclingUK) December 1, 2021

The post DfT Highway Code Consultation 2020 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

With Covid-19 cases rising again, and Government lock-down regulations further restricting how businesses operate, it is more important than ever that local streets support social distancing so that people feel safe and can confidently go out and use local shops and services. Updated government guidance (at 23/9/2020) also reconfirms the recommendation that for local journeys you should “walk or cycle if you can” to “reduce pressure on public transport and the road network.”

The Council has confirmed that its initial trial “social distancing layout” for Gosforth High Street is complete and is seeking feedback on the changes that have been made. As at the end of September, the majority of people who have provided feedback feel that the new layout is not effective in meeting the objectives to support social distancing and support walking and cycling.

Does this layout support social distancing? Or walking and cycling?

Why have the changes been made?

The changes made to Gosforth High Street are part of the UK Government’s response to Covid-19, which has included a wide range of new regulations and recommendations about how, when and where we can travel, and who we can meet. Covid-19, as we now know, is approximately 10 times more deadly than flu, can lead to “significant ongoing health problems” and it has recently been reported that only 18% of people with COVID systems adhere to self-isolation.

The Government’s statutory guidance, issued in May 2020, stated that “Local authorities in areas with high levels of public transport use should take measures to reallocate road space to people walking and cycling, both to encourage active travel and to enable social distancing” and that those changes be implemented “as swiftly as possible.”

The government’s rationale for encouraging people to walk or cycle are:

1. Because public transport capacity is reduced and if people stop cycling and drive instead then roads will be even busier than they are now.
2. Because walking and cycling help improve fitness, and there is “a significant link between COVID-19 recovery and fitness”.
3. Because walking and cycling are “affordable, deliver significant health benefits, have been shown to improve wellbeing, mitigate congestion [and] improve air quality.”

Gosforth has always had a high level of public transport use, both because of the Metro and the many buses that use the Great North Road, so is exactly the sort of location the Government intended to target with its guidance.

The Council say they will consider feedback after a three week review period that started on 11 September. If you have any thoughts on the scheme, including suggestions for how to make it better support physical distancing and walking and cycling, you can provide feedback at https://safegosforthhighstreet.commonplace.is

In this blog we look at aspects of the trial scheme that we think have worked, and where improvements could be made to better support the objectives set by central government.

Regent Centre

What has changed?

• One of the south-bound traffic lanes has been reallocated to enable the pavement on the east side next to Gosforth Central Middle School to be made wider.
• The existing cycle lanes north and south-bound have both been protected by a row of wands.

As we said above, one of the government’s objectives is to encourage active travel to reduce pressure on the road network. This photo from November 2019 shows how danger for people walking and cycling was designed-in to the existing road layout.

Regent Centre traffic camera – November 2019

This section of the Great North Road has always been the weakest link in the cycle route linking Brunton Lane to Little Moor via Moor Road North and Moor Road South. Adding protection to the cycle lane here addresses many of the issues in the picture above and makes this section far safer for people to cycle.

The pavement along this stretch is also narrow, and on the east side the width is further reduced by guardrail. Adding to the width of the pavement here helps social distancing, especially when the pavement is busy around school drop off and pick up times. Removing the railings would add further to the space available for people to walk.

Extra space for walking and a protected cycle lane next to Regent Centre

This more recent traffic camera picture below shows how the cycle lane is now protected in both directions, and how cars heading southbound are now directed towards the middle of the road. Prior to this change it was common for cars to cut into the cycle lane where it passes next to the pedestrian crossing, creating a risk for people cycling.

Traffic Camera view of the Metro bridge at Regent Centre

Changing this has made little difference to vehicle traffic as very few buses use this section of road and other vehicles heading south have to filter into the right hand lane after Christon Road  anyway.

There are still issues though. The north-bound lane cycling lane is only partially protected and its still not unusual to find yourself in a situation like in the photo below where the cycle lane directs you into a dangerous position on the inside of an HGV.

Protecting the cycle at this point would help substantially. It would also help to remove a section of railings just north of Asda to allow access to and from Asda without having to use Hollywood Avenue.

Unprotected cycle lane in the HGVs blind spot next to Regent Centre

We have also highlighted previously that the crossing by Christon Road is not large enough. If this were a single stage crossing, there would be plenty of space for both walking and cycling, and the crossing itself could be adapted by simply removing the railings giving more space for everyone to cross. This would also reduce the danger to children stuck at the edge of the crossing.

Children crossing the Great North Road by Christon Road – picture taken July 2019

Christon Road to Salters Road

What has changed?

• One of the north-bound traffic lanes has been reallocated to create a protected cycle lane.
• There is now only one traffic lane entering the Salters Road junction heading south-bound.

This is another section of road that previously most people would not have been willing to cycle but now can, at least if heading north. The lane is interrupted by the bus stop, and some people might find the speed humps uncomfortable, but both could be easily resolved if further funding is released by government. Initial government funding only covered low-cost temporary materials.

North-bound cycle lane just south of Henry Street.

South-bound, there are no additional facilities for walking or cycling, though the pavement is wide enough already. Rather than hashing out the central section of the road (as shown in the picture below), it would have been possible to create a protected cycle lane heading southbound from the end of the bus lane to connect to the advanced stop line at the traffic lights.

Traffic Camera looking north from Salters Road

Salters Road to St Nicholas Avenue

What has changed?

• One of the north-bound traffic lanes has been reallocated to enable the pavement on the west side of the road to be widened.
• The north-bound road layout at Salters Road junction is substantially unchanged and there is still one north-bound / left-turn lane and one right-turn lane.
• Railings have been removed by the Queen Victoria pub and replaced with a row of wands to widen the pavement.

Outside Barluga and Trinity Church wands have been used to widen the pavement. These are the same type of wands as have been used north of Salters Road for the cycle lane, but we  know this is intended for walking because the give way markings at West Avenue have been moved in line with the wands. If it was for cycling, the give way lines should have remained where they were to give priority to people travelling along the main road.

An even better arrangement would be to move the give way lines to before the pavement so people walking along the main road also have priority as we proposed in 2016, or make the current road exit into permanent pavement like at Woodbine Road, effectively expanding Trinity Square across the ends of West Avenue and Ivy Road.

Junction of West Avenue and Gosforth High Street

There are still narrow sections of pavement on the west side, especially at the north end of the High Street. In the picture below, there’s little extra space to queue for the bus, and cafe seating (which normally would be a good thing) further reduces the pavement width to less than 2m.

Cafe Corsaro

Next to Salters Road by the junction, the extra pavement space is not well used. If this is to be retained as pavement then the railings would need to be removed and a more substantial barrier inserted where the wands are to protect people from moving traffic. Alternatively it could be repurposed as a cycle lane to enable people cycling to access the advance stop line and the cycle lane heading north at the far side of the junction.

Junction of Gosforth High Street and Salters Road / Church Road

While the west side of the High Street has space for social distancing along most of its length, the east side still does not. The pavement outside Gosforth Shopping Centre is not much wider than 2m, far short of the 4m advertised in the proposal. The south-bound traffic lane next to the pavement is only lightly used, so it could easily be converted to extra pavement space.

Rook Matthews Sayer, Outside Gosforth Shopping Centre

Adding to the pavement here would also create space for people to wait for the pedestrian crossing, and reduce the width of the crossing.

The one section of the pavement on the east side that has been widened is by the Queen Victoria pub, previously one of the narrowest pavements on the High Street. Here the Council have removed railings that used to cramp the pavement so now the full width of the pavement is available for use. Not being able to use the full pavement width is an issue for much of the High Street because of bollards and other street furniture.

New wider pavement on the east of the High Street next to the Queen Victoria pub

St Nicholas Avenue to Hawthorn Road

What has changed?

• Part of the north-bound traffic lane has been reallocated to enable the pavement on the west side of the road to be widened.

For most of the road between St Nicholas Avenue and The County very few measures have been taken to support social distancing or enable walking or cycling. This is one of the widest sections of the High Street being over 12m for most of its length. That’s space for two 3m road lanes, two 1.5m cycle lanes with plenty of space left for a bus lay by or loading. For comparison, the road lanes outside Gosforth Shopping Centre prior to these changes were each approximately 2.5m wide.

This section of the High Street would also be the perfect place should local businesses want to try something like a car-free Saturday, as has proved a success at Park View in Whitley Bay.

Looking north from The County pub. No measures implemented here.

By St Nicholas Avenue extra space has been marked out and, while people mostly stay on the existing pavement, people are using the extra space to overtake or enable others to pass if walking in the opposite direction. In these locations, at least, the one-way walking arrows could be removed.

Traffic camera view showing busy pavements and a queue outside Flowercraft

South of Hawthorn Road

What has changed?

• The existing south-bound cycle lane has been protected by wands.
• A new protected cycle lane has been created north-bound, also using wands.

The south-bound lane still suffers in part from being blocked by parking, but the wands do make it safer for people cycling on this section of road.

South-bound cycle lane opposite Elmfield Road

The extra north bound lane means people cycling north can continue to Hawthorn Road before turning left rather than having to turn into Elmfield Road, which is narrow and frequently uncomfortable because of high levels of traffic.

It also means people who want to social distance can step into the cycle lane briefly if they need to pass someone, without risking being hit by a car or a bus.

North bound cycle lane between Elmfield Road and Hawthorn Avenue.

Emergency Services

Despite the High Street still being very wide (approximately 9m in the picture below), we know some people have shared concerns about traffic holding up emergency services. We don’t have access to specific figures but it is a reasonable assumption that heavy traffic could have an impact. This would be the case whether this scheme had been implemented or not.

The Blue Light Aware website contains instructional videos for how to drive if an emergency vehicle needs to get past and is well worth a look. Even better – leave your car at home when you can, to avoid adding to the traffic.

Ambulance with blue lights next to Trinity Square.

There are a number of potential options that could be considered to improve the design for emergency services, while also helping to meet the objectives of the scheme:

1. Replacing wands with bolt-down kerbs that cars can drive over if needed to get out of the way.
2. Better enforcement and / or updating road markings to prevent parked cars obstructing emergency vehicles.
3. Creating a 2-way cycle lane that emergency services can use to bypass traffic if needed, but which can be used at other times by people cycling, scooting or mobility scooters.
4. Remove the kerb separating north and south-bound traffic lanes by Regent Centre.

We do know that data from Waltham Forest where low-traffic neighbourhoods have been implemented showed no adverse impact on emergency response times.

Air Pollution

While it’s too early to draw any lasting conclusions, air pollution measurements from the Urban Observatory suggest that air quality on Gosforth High Street in September 2020 has generally been better than in previous Septembers. The map below shows the location of monitors and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) concentrations in September 2018, 2019 and 2020. Figures highlighted in red are above the annual average legal limit of 40μg/m³.

Urban Observatory Air Pollution averages for September 2018, 2019 and 2020. Higher values = more pollution.

Main Road Traffic Re-Routing via Minor Roads

A concern we highlighted in our blog Enabling Businesses to Open Safely on Gosforth High Street from July was the potential for traffic to re-route via minor roads rather than staying on the main road network. Since then UK-wide data has been released showing that in the last ten years across the UK traffic levels on minor roads has increased dramatically, believed to be largely due to the use of sat navs in cars. Google itself has published an article on this Google Maps 101: How AI helps predict traffic and determine routes.

Our experience locally is that current traffic levels are no worse than in 2019, but 2019 levels of traffic on minor roads, including on Moor Road north and south, are still unacceptable. Hollywood Avenue and the area around Stoneyhurst Road have been much improved by the installation of “point closures” to stop main road traffic using these routes as an alternative. The same approach needs to be used on minor roads either side of Gosforth High Street to make them safe as well.

Cycling Routes

For cycling more generally, we have seen suggestions that everyone should use the Moor Road North / Moor Road South route. This is a bit like suggesting cars are banned from Gosforth High Street and should use the A1 western bypass instead.

All types of transport rely on having a network or grid of routes, the only difference being the density of the grid. Walking should be possible via all streets, cycling via a grid of about 400m (the distance between parallel routes) or less near major destinations, and driving with a grid > 1km other than for access. Within those grids, some routes might be defined as being for longer journeys, like the A1, and others like Gosforth High Street for accessing local destinations.

The map below shows a possible grid of cycling routes, that also shows how Gosforth High Street currently acts as a barrier for east / west journeys. One main reason more people don’t cycle is danger from vehicle traffic. In Newcastle’s twin city of Groningen where safe routes have been provided, 61% of all trips are made by bicycle, including more than 70% for trips made to educational institutions.

A possible grid of cycle routes to access shops and services on Gosforth High Street.

Next Steps

One option would be just to remove the scheme and revert back to how it was. While that might have an advantage of familiarity, it would do nothing to help achieve the government’s objectives to enable physical distancing and help people to walk or cycle. Many of the responses to the Council’s survey mention pollution and congestion, but Gosforth High Street has long been one of the most polluted, congested streets in Newcastle, and also has a poor safety record. Returning it to its original layout would not solve any of these concerns.

A High Street that is polluted, noisy and dangerous, and where social distancing is difficult, will not help local businesses. if we want a street that is less polluted, less noisy and less dangerous, that can only happen if space is made available, as the government has instructed, to allow people to walk and cycle safely. If that does impact journey times for vehicles, and we can’t be certain for a few months until changes have bedded in whether it will or not, then the Council will have to decide if it values a cleaner, safer High Street or if priority will be given to passing traffic.

If you haven’t already, please do take a few minutes to provide feedback to the Council via https://safegosforthhighstreet.commonplace.is

Update 11/12/2020

Newcastle City Council have released their report on the High Street measures, stating that “the social distancing measures on Gosforth High Street between Regents Centre and Elmfield Road should remain in place” and that “the review panel has decided that the benefits to people’s health and the local economy far outweigh the criticisms.” There is a link to the detail report at the end of the Council news story.

Some key findings from the report:

• The initial high congestion levels have settled into a pattern now that schools have returned.
• Air quality has not been degraded and as mode use continues to alter, this is likely to settle further.
• Bus operators are now finding little delay southbound.
• No issues reported by the fire and ambulance services.

Recommendations in the report:

• The northbound section from Hawthorn Terrace to Salters Road should be reserved for those on foot and marked appropriately. The use will be clarified with pedestrian symbols on the carriageway and the ends of the widened sections are to be closed.
• Communications around the purpose and operation of the scheme should be improved. The directional arrows upon pavements should be removed.

The Council feedback website is still open if you wish to provide any further feedback or suggestions for how to improve the scheme: https://safegosforthhighstreet.commonplace.is

The SPACE for Gosforth response

The following is the SPACE for Gosforth response to the Council regarding the initial temporary measures. This was sent on 4 October 2020.

I am writing on behalf of SPACE for Gosforth to respond to the Council’s Safe Gosforth High Street consultation.

I have attached a pdf copy of our detail review, which is also published here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/safe-gosforth-high-street/

While the scheme isn’t quite what was advertised, there are some good parts, which we have tried to highlight in the article, especially the Regent Centre changes and protecting the cycle lanes south of The County. Where the pavement has been widened, the High Street does feel more comfortable to use on foot, even if it is not as clear as it could be which parts are widened pavement and which are cycle lane.

Having reviewed the Commonplace feedback though, it looks like many of those that have fed back do not think the initial layout is effective (or sufficient?) to support social distancing or to enable more walking and cycling, while others appear to be trying to second-guess or challenge the government guidance on social distancing.

Much of the negative feedback appears to be related to the inevitable short-term disruption, which wasn’t helped by A1 works or the gas works on Jesmond Dene Road. These talk about congestion and pollution, but we have looked at pollution figures, published in the blog, which show September this year had cleaner air on average than either September 2019 or September 2018. Arguably also, a few minutes extra on a short journey is also a small inconvenience compared say to not being able to see friends or family, mandatory self-isolation for vulnerable groups or the closures of schools over the summer term.

To some extent, this is just the nature of the trial process, which we support, that you have to try something and then adapt from there. Hopefully the large amount of feedback provided will enable you to do that and the next iteration of the scheme will better enable social distancing and further improve facilities for walking and cycling.

Some additional points from us:

1. Government guidance for travel (at 30/9/2020) still says walking and cycling should be the preferred modes of travel, and that we should all maintain 2 metre distance where possible to minimise risk of transmission. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-safer-travel-guidance-for-passengers
2. There needs to be some explainable logic linked to that guidance as to where on the High Street wider pavement is needed (or not needed) for social distancing, where a cycle lane that allows people on foot to pass is sufficient, and where the pavement can be left as is. Currently the scheme contains a mix of approaches, including some pavements that are not much wider than 2m, which we think will be adding to people’s unease.
3. In some places the road width is still up to 9m wide, which encourages vehicle speeding and overtaking outside peak hours, and on multiple occasions I have seen cars racing off the line heading south from St Nicholas Av. While acknowledging the need for deliveries and emergency services to pass we think this needs to be addressed, not least so the extra space can be used in support of the scheme objectives to enable social distancing and active travel. We have included some ideas to support emergency services in our review.
4. Both the Grey Street and bridges schemes have benefited from inclusion of change to improve the look and feel such as planters. It would be useful to consider this for Gosforth High Street as well. Extra cycle parking, like the rack designed to look like a parked car on Collingwood Street, could also be installed at the end of Hawthorn Road or St Nicholas Avenue.
5. It would also show some joined-up thinking if the next iteration considered streets either side of the High Street and what needs to be done to allow social distancing there e.g. Regent Centre, Christon Road, and prevent main road traffic from re-routing e.g. Linden Road, Elmfield Road, Moor Road North, Moor Road South.
6. It’s good to see the walk to school week comms but prior to this Council comms have been fairly infrequent whereas most guidance on situations where people are being asked to change what they do recommend frequent reinforcement of the objectives and benefits of the change. Transport for Greater Manchester have done a lot on this and I expect they may be willing for other authorities to re-use their materials? e.g. https://twitter.com/OfficialTfGM/status/1312393231456501762

The post Safe Gosforth High Street appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Stoneyhurst Road 30 July 2020, just before 9am.

Newcastle City Council has now confirmed that legal orders to close local bridges to vehicle traffic will be in place by Thursday 13 August. This is to prevent “inappropriate levels of traffic for small structures, using the bridges as a shortcut through residential streets.”

As with any traffic-related changes these proposals have generated a lot of debate in Gosforth.  To help ensure this debate is an informed one we published a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Enabling Safe Walking and Cycling via Local Bridges explaining likely benefits, possible issues and how residents will be able to have a say on the proposals.

Legal orders to close Salters Bridge, Castle Farm Rd (Dene Bridge), Haldane Bridge, Argyle St Bridge and Stoneyhurst Bridge to traffic will be in place from 13 August. This is to reduce traffic and encourage more walking and cycling. Read more at https://t.co/QTfnJWBXHw. pic.twitter.com/Pz7jzN57hd

— NewcastleCityCouncil (@NewcastleCC) August 4, 2020

Since then, we’ve become aware of some further concerns, relating to the consultation process and specifically to the area around Stoneyhurst Road Metro bridge. Where there are legitimate issues it is important that these are raised, but also where residents’ concerns are likely to be unfounded it is important that residents have the necessary information to be able to make this judgement.

This blog is to look at some of those concerns. Where we have included quotes about concerns, these are from comments or email correspondence sent to SPACE for Gosforth.

Summary

1. There’s no justification for the suggestion that 20mph “single track” roads leading to Station Road are dangerous for people who are driving, or that the junctions onto Station Road are in any way different or more dangerous than other similar junctions.
2. Challenges faced by residents in snowy or icy conditions will be no worse than on many other local roads. Residents who can’t avoid travelling and have to use a car still have two relatively level entry/exit routes via Balmoral Terrace and Windsor Terrace.
3. Traffic levels should reduce overall on Audley Road, Sandringham Road, Windsor Terrace, Balmoral Terrace and other local streets. This should improve safety for people who do walk or cycle, including when the roads are icy.
4. Generally the change will result in opportunities for residents to save money, as walking or cycling are much cheaper than driving, with a minimal impact on driving times or distances other than for very short local journeys.
5. Council comms confirm that vehicle capacity at Haddricks Mill has been increased.
6. The Council, and Government, are acting on a democratic mandate to make streets safer for walking and cycling. These changes have a substantial potential to help improve people’s health and wellbeing.

Our thinking & analysis to support these summary statements is below.

In our previous FAQ blog Enabling Safe Walking and Cycling via Local Bridges, we also confirmed that:

• Based on experience when Killingworth Road was closed, we don’t expect any substantial increase in traffic on Station Road. Pollution levels measured at the bottom of Station Road actually improved.
• Emergency Services have confirmed they have no issue with the proposal.
• The consultation approach will be more effective by allowing residents to “try before they buy”.

Update 9/9/2020: The Council have also published a response to Frequently Asked Questions on its SafeNewcastleBridges website.

Concern 1: It isn’t safe to exit by car onto Station Road

“the exits from Sandringham, Audley or Windsor are not the safest ways to get out of the area as they are single track.”

We can find absolutely no justification for the statement that single track roads with a 20mph speed limit, such as those described, present any substantive safety risk to anyone travelling by car. Vision Zero guidelines suggest that cars should be limited to 70kmph/43mph where there is a possibility of a frontal impact between cars, so 20mph is certainly safe enough.

Safety for people walking and cycling (vulnerable road users) is affected by speed and volume of traffic including on Stoneyhurst Road. Safety should be improved on these local streets because of the reduction in traffic levels (see below). As we explained in our blog Enabling Safe Walking and Cycling via Local Bridges, this should help enable more people to  walk or cycle local journeys.

The junctions with Station Road are little different to many other similar junctions, and may actually be safer due to relatively tight corners that require drivers to slow down before turning.

If this does become an issue (which we don’t think it will), one option might be to reset the speed limit for that section of Station Road to 20mph. This would also make it safer for people walking or cycling on Station Road, and would be likely to reduce pollution levels as a vehicle accelerating to 20mph uses less fuel than one accelerating to 30mph. We hope this might be considered as part of the consultation review.

Concern 2: Dene Crescent cannot be used in winter

“the exit onto Haddrick’s Mill Rd from Dene Crescent is lethal in winter even with the grit box”

To look at this we have assessed whether the proposal will lead to more or fewer people using Dene Crescent by car in wintery conditions, and other options for exiting the estate if Dene Crescent is not usable.

The Highways Code Rule 228 is very clear that you should not drive in icy or snowy weather unless your journey is essential. If your journey is essential and you have no choice but to drive, you should “drive with care, even if the roads have been treated.”

This should mean the volume of traffic if icy or snowy should be much lower than on a normal day, especially now many of us are able to work from home. That will be true whether this proposal is implemented or not.

Closing Stoneyhurst Road bridge to motor traffic should also reduce the volume of traffic, as vehicles that would have used Stoneyhurst Road bridge to get to Dene Crescent, possibly by non-local drivers who would be less aware of the dangers, can no longer do so.

Having fewer vehicles using Dene Crescent in winter is a safety benefit in itself. Dene Crescent is also one of only a few residential streets that are on the Council’s published gritting route. Even if that is not sufficient, residents who need to make essential journeys by car have other options and contrary to some claims we have seen, no one is being “forced” to use Dene Crescent.

GoogleMaps states that Balmoral Terrace drops 4m over a distance of about 350m, which is a gradient of not much more than 1%,  which is likely to be less steep than the transverse slope  that is required on roads to allow drainage. It is also likely to be less than the gradient of the speed bumps on Stoneyhurst Road. The gradient on Windsor Terrace is not much greater.

For residents living on Sandringham Road and Audley Road, which according to GoogleMaps have average gradients of about 2.8%, the main challenge will be exiting those roads especially if facing uphill. That would be no different from now though, and would be unaffected by the proposed change.

By comparison nearby Keyes Gardens has a gradient of 3.6%, Hunter’s Road next to Haddricks Mill is close to 7% and many other streets bordering Jesmond Dene are steeper than this.

That’s not to say that driving in winter will be all plain sailing, only that the challenges faced by residents will be no worse than on many other local roads, and that an overall reduction in traffic levels should improve safety for people who do walk or cycle.

Concern 3: “more traffic using Audley, Sandringham, Windsor & Balmoral“

In our FAQ, question 6 we provided evidence to show that there was unlikely to be any substantial impact to local main roads as a result of the bridge closures. This concern is a bit different in that it relates to local streets.

We shared the picture below in our FAQ blog, of nine locations in Newcastle where similar approaches have been taken, and none of these areas are prone to “chaos” or “road rage” as some have suggested will happen on Stoneyhurst Road, in fact quite the opposite. All are very quiet, pleasant streets.

The benefit of the consultation approach, of course, is that we don’t have to agree on what we think the impact will be, as we will be able to see what actually happens once people have had a chance to adjust to the new layout, and residents can provide feedback on that basis.

We sought clarification from the person who made this comment. Their reasoning is that “If the bridge is closed there will be increased traffic as cars cannot disappear instantly from people’s lives. The traffic would have one less exit point so Audley, Sandringham, Windsor or Balmoral would be used”

There are a number of issues with this statement. ‘Cars not disappearing‘ doesn’t mean people can’t change how they travel for particular journeys, and certainly doesn’t justify the statement ‘increased traffic’. We can all help reduce traffic by ‘leaving our cars at home’ and walking, cycling or taking the bus. It also focuses specifically on just one scenario (residents exiting or entering the estate) without taking into account other types of journey on those streets including from through traffic.

To try to explain this a bit more we’ve sketched out four examples of what might happen to show the likely effect.

Example 1 shows the specific journey type referenced to justify the concern. It involves a car journey starting on Audley Road heading west along Church Avenue. Currently the driver might choose to cross Stoneyhurst Road bridge and turn onto Church Avenue by the Grove. A new possible route would be via Windsor Terrace. The diagram below shows these two options but only the parts of the routes up to the point where they exits onto Church Avenue/Station Road.

Example 1: Exiting by car facing south onto Church Avenue / Station Road

By itself this example does suggest that traffic on Windsor Terrace might increase, but it is worth remembering that while the focus of opponents to the proposals has been east of the bridge, the streets on the west side are also residential and will, in this example, have a corresponding reduction in traffic.

If we measure distance driven in the estate before exiting onto a main road there is actually a reduction of 300m or 37% compared to the current route.

This example assumes the vehicle was parked facing south. If facing north, as shown on the map below, that would be an even greater (~82%, 900m) reduction in distance driven within the estate, and one fewer journey on Windsor Terrace.

Example 1b: Exiting by car facing north onto Church Avenue / Station Road

Example 2 shows the opposite where someone returning from the east would currently enter the estate by Audley Road, but with the new layout would travel via the Grove. This reduces traffic on the east of the bridge, with a corresponding increase on the west.

Example 2: Returning home

Again though, the distance travelled in the estate is reduced, in this case by 18%, and in both cases traffic reduces in the area around the bridge itself and the turning into Alnmouth Drive next to South Gosforth First School.

Because of this offsetting, it is unlikely that any one street would see any substantive increase in traffic levels, but actually we’re expecting overall traffic to reduce so we need to look at two further scenarios to see why this is.

Example 3 shows a route that might be taken by someone who doesn’t live on the estate who is using these streets to avoid heavy traffic on the main road. If the change encourages this person to use the main road network instead, which is arguably where they should have been in the first place, then that represents a reduction in traffic on the estate.

Example 3: Using main roads instead or local streets

Example 4 shows someone who currently drives but as the change reduces traffic levels now feels comfortable cycling and can use the bridge to access off-road / quiet cycle routes leading into the city centre or elsewhere in Newcastle.  Again this is a reduction in traffic on estate streets without any corresponding increase on other roads.

Example 4: Cycling instead of driving

Many people have started cycling during lockdown and this change, and changes like it, are important to enable them to continue as traffic levels rise again.

In our FAQ blog we shared evidence that when similar changes have been made elsewhere people walk and cycle more. We also know from national surveys that many journeys that people currently drive are relatively short and that a substantial proportion of people say themselves that they could just as easily walk, cycle or use public transport for those journeys.

All four of the examples lead to less distance being driven on estate streets, which strongly suggests (as has happened elsewhere) that there will be a reduction in traffic levels on the estate despite claims to the contrary. But as we said previously, the benefit of the approach taken is that you don’t have to take our word for it.

“You get the traffic you build for….Years of research conclude that building more roads generates additional traffic, and reducing the amount of road-space evaporates some traffic”. In this sense traffic behaves more like a gas that evaporates than a liquid that displaces. pic.twitter.com/6E1Ozfxyop

— Robert Burns (@robertburns73) August 5, 2020

Concern 4: Increased cost of local taxi journeys

“potentially the fare will be higher as the taxi sits in a traffic jam in Sandringham Rd caused by the closure of the Stoneyhurst Rd Bridge.”

We demonstrated in our blog East Gosforth – Streets for People that for longer journeys this change will make practically no difference to journey times. Very short, local journeys though may become a little longer if a car is used, although in most cases by no more than a few hundred metres. As above, with less traffic travelling through the estate there’s no reason to believe that queues to exit onto Sandringham Road will be any worse than now.

Generally the intention of low traffic neighbourhoods is to encourage people who can walk or cycle shorter local journeys, up to say 2-3 miles, to do so. Everyone benefits from this. For the person making the journey, they save money and get a bit of exercise while they travel. For everyone else, traffic on local streets is reduced so roads are quieter, less polluted and easier to use for those that do need to use a vehicle.

A big social justice issue related to transport is that a lack of alternatives to driving can mean people on lower incomes are forced to dedicate large parts of their income to paying for a car. Strategic point closures to motor traffic, such as at Stoneyhurst Road bridge, along with cycling safety measures on main roads, create an environment where people feel safe cycling, enabling them to avoid the costs of car ownership and driving.

We also need to be aware in our own thinking to avoid status quo bias, where the status quo is taken as a reference point, and any change from that point is perceived as a loss. This means taking care to consider both positive and negative effects of change and weighing them up as a whole. In general enabling people to walk or cycle helps people save money, potentially equivalent to a 8% pay rise.

Another example of status quo bias is the idea that preventing through traffic from using minor streets displaces traffic onto major roads, whereas it is equally or perhaps more valid to suggest that the absence of point closures is the thing that causes main-road traffic to re-route via minor streets.

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods do not 'displace' through-traffic onto main roads; their absence displaces main road traffic onto residential roads. Other people's neighbourhoods should not be used as a pressure release valve for the fact that there are too many cars on the road.

— Jon Burke MIEMA CEnv (@jonburkeUK) July 14, 2020

Concern 5: Lack of Capacity at Haddricks Mill junction

Although there is evidence to suggest that neighbouring streets won’t see any substantial increase in traffic, we have seen concerns that the new Haddricks Mill junction does not have sufficient capacity if these changes were to lead to increased traffic on Station Road or Haddricks Mill Road.

While we have many, many concerns about the Haddricks Mill junction, lack of vehicle capacity is not one of them. Arguably it will have too much capacity and will induce extra traffic onto surrounding roads contrary to the Council’s own environmental ambitions.

This additional capacity has been created in two ways: through the repositioning of the mini-roundabouts; and through the use of the pedestrian lights to control traffic flow onto the junction to favour busier routes. We have been told by Council engineers that the new design has a similar increased capacity to the much bigger roundabout that was originally proposed. The Council’s news release has further information on this. 

2016 Haddricks Mill proposals, now superseded.

Concern 6: The use of Experimental Traffic Orders is not “democratic” 

“in democracies, it is usual to consult first and take advice from the electorate.”

Actually the electorate has been consulted on the need to enable active travel, via both national and local elections. The consultation for the bridges can, and should, take an even wider range of inputs including the views of under 18s who are not entitled to vote at local elections but who are just as much users of local streets as anyone else.

The Conservative government, which is funding these changes and setting the conditions as to what can or cannot be done with the money, has a democratic mandate to implement its manifesto commitments including to “support commuter cycling routes, so that more people can cycle safely to work and more families can go out together.” The Conservative Party said it would “create a new £350 million Cycling Infrastructure Fund with mandatory design standards for new routes.” Our blog on party manifestos for the 2019 General Election is here.

The mandatory standards are now reflected in the Government’s funding conditions and require Councils to take urgent action that will be effective to enable people to walk and cycle. So, for example, a suggestion we received to implement “yellow lines around the school and on the bridge and a leaflet campaign to ask parents to use cars less & act with consideration” would not be funded, unless part of a wider scheme because by itself it would not comply with the mandated standards.

Local political parties also made manifesto commitments supporting active travel, and the Council itself has consulted on its proposals for air quality, climate change both of which require a reduction in vehicle emissions, and has specifically sought input from residents on how to enable more walking and cycling.

Residents’ comments made in response to the Council’s consultation on walking and cycling

The purpose of consultation on specific schemes is slightly different. The Council already has a democratic mandate to improve road safety and air quality and enable more people to walk and cycle, and is entitled to put forward proposals that it believes will be effective in doing so.

In this case, the Council is using an experimental traffic order, which allows for changes to be put in place using temporary materials so people can see and experience, and so better understand the impact of the change before commenting. Many of the concerns mentioned as reasons to stop the bridge closure such as air quality, traffic queues or environmental impact would actually be better addressed by allowing the closure to go ahead.

While the Council has had to use this approach due to Government funding conditions stating work must start quickly, it is neither new or unusual. Emergency legislation due to Covid-19 only adjusted how Council’s need to advertise changes and not the process itself.

We set out in our FAQ (question 1) why we think this approach is likely to lead to a more informed debate and therefore a better outcome than holding a full consultation in advance. This should be the case even if you believe the changes will (despite all evidence to the contrary) lead to increased traffic, danger or pollution. As it stands the Council would dismiss those concerns as not being supported by evidence, whereas neither the Council nor opponents of the closure can dismiss what actually happens. As above, and in line with available evidence, our expectation is that this change will lead to quieter, safer local streets.

Priorities

More importantly, this change is about health, to enable more people to walk or cycle safely and to avoid crowding on public transport. An estimated 84,000 people die each year in England and Wales due to inactivity and 40,000 in the UK die due to air pollution. Children, who only a generation ago would have enjoyed a substantial amount of freedom are now driven even short journeys because of the danger from other vehicles. The NHS advises that “As you get older, it becomes even more important to remain active if you want to stay healthy and maintain your independence.” Walking and cycling are amongst the most effective ways of achieving this. Many studies have shown the significant health benefits from enabling people to walk or cycle more, as well as a potential £17bn saving to the NHS.

While the changes proposed won’t achieve all of these benfits by themselves, they are a start. We understand there will be opposition to any change, but we hope people will keep an open mind and consider the potential benefits, as well as any downsides, when evaluating the proposals and providing feedback.

The Council’s feedback website for all five bridges that will be closed to motor traffic is here. Please do click on the link and let the Council know what you think of the proposals.

The post Stoneyhurst Bridge – Review of Concerns appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Stoneyhurst Road, next to South Gosforth First School.

Newcastle City Council has announced plans, as part of its Covid-19 response, to close five local bridges to through traffic, so they can be used in safety by people who don’t currently feel comfortable walking or cycling because of the volume of traffic. 

Three of these bridges, Salters Bridge, Stoneyhurst Road and Castle Farm Road, are in Gosforth. All three currently experience high levels of traffic even though they are not part of the main road network, and all three have long-term road safety concerns despite calming measures having been put in place.

The three Gosforth bridges also have significant potential to enable people to walk or cycle local journeys travelling east to west or vice versa across the Ouseburn, where currently there are very few safe options. This includes routes to The Freeman Hospital, Benton Park View Government offices and St Mary’s High School.

Map showing where roads will be closed to through traffic and walking / cycling routes that have been made safer as a result. The main road network is shown shaded orange.

Change is required urgently, both under the terms of the emergency funding being provided by Government, but also because public transport capacity is significantly reduced due to social distancing and likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future. 

The aim is to give people who would have used the bus or Metro, including those that don’t have access to a car, a safe alternative option so public transport can still be used by those that need it most, including key workers, older people and people with disabilities.

This also helps mitigate the risk that more people will drive because they can’t use public transport, which would lead to increased traffic, delays and potentially more air pollution. It is especially important to enable more walking and cycling now to ensure air pollution does not go back up as there is compelling evidence that air pollution is linked to significant increases in Covid-19  infections, hospital admissions and deaths. Doctors are also advising people to take exercise to help reduce their chances of becoming severely ill from Covid-19.

Bus and Metro capacity are substantially reduced due to Covid-19.

This is important context as, for all the inevitable (and most likely incorrect) predictions of traffic chaos, the consequences of not making these changes would most likely be substantially worse, with the biggest negative impact being felt by those that rely on public transport and those that need to drive, whether for work, health or any other reason.

The rest of this blog takes the form of a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about these changes. As ever, where we present evidence we’ll link to original sources so if you want to take a deeper look you can. Please feel free to ask further questions, or suggest other topics for the FAQ in the comments section below.

1. How can I have a say?

Under normal circumstances there would be a consultation in advance of the changes being implemented, but this isn’t possible due to the urgent need to provide alternatives to public transport while also minimising air pollution.

Instead, the Council are using what is called an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order. This means that while the Council intends for the changes to be permanent, it will consult with residents before making a final decision. The Council will announce how to provide feedback once the changes have been made. 

This “try before you buy” approach is one we have long supported for a number of reasons.

1. Where there are known issues (in this case cuts in public transport capacity) it enables benefits to be achieved much more quickly. Issues could also include cutting air pollution, giving people a greater choice in how to travel, or making it safer for children to travel to school.
2. It is much easier for people to understand what is proposed if they can see it on the ground, rather than having to interpret from text on a website or engineering drawings. 
3. It shows what the effects will actually be, rather than just what people (or the Council) believe the effects could be, and allows any issues to be resolved prior to the scheme being made permanent. 
4. It increases engagement substantially compared to a newsletter or social media post, as people are much more likely to notice something that has actually changed.

The combination of these – clearer understanding, more engagement and better feedback – should ultimately lead to a better quality scheme for the benefit of local residents achieved much more quickly. 

Clearly people will be concerned about the impact and the Council should provide information to address those concerns. Studies have shown though that reallocating road space to enable people to walk or cycle, as the Government has instructed, is rarely as disruptive as people imagine but does create significant benefits for local communities.

The Council has previously consulted on Salters Bridge and more generally on how to improve walking and cycling routes across the City. All three locations were highlighted by local residents as places where they didn’t feel safe to walk or cycle. 

Traffic queue, and no pavements, at Castle Farm Road. Treacherous if walking or cycling, especially after dark.

2. Are there any other benefits?

There are many health, travel and economic benefits of making it easier for people to walk or cycle, not least that they help reduce the overall burden on the NHS at a time when capacity might still be needed for a second peak of Covid-19. 

While many of us in stable jobs won’t have felt the full impact, Covid-19 has already led to a significant contraction in the economy and potentially millions of jobs could be lost. Walking and cycling schemes give people a choice to travel more cheaply for local journeys (equivalent to a 8% pay increase compared to driving) and access employment opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable, and are a highly effective way of generating new jobs.

Removing through traffic from these bridges should also help reduce the Council’s maintenance liability at a time when finances are already stretched, as bridges, especially older bridges, will be more expensive to maintain than a normal section of road. 

For people living near these bridges or on connecting routes, our expectation is this change should lead to quieter, safer local streets. Stopping through traffic in residential areas is also a necessary first step for anyone who wants to see improvements on nearby main roads to make them safer for local residents.

Streets with less traffic have also been shown to be nicer, more neighbourly places to live, as explained in the video below.

3. How will emergency services be affected?

Emergency services have already been consulted and have confirmed they have no concerns with these proposals.

Making these changes will help avoid the gridlock that could be caused if public transport users have to drive instead through lack of alternative options. Avoiding that scenario will be essential to allow emergency services to continue to operate effectively.

In more normal times, when low traffic neighbourhoods were implemented in Waltham Forest in London prior to Covid-19, the evidence is that emergency response times did not substantially change.

Similar arrangements have already been implemented closer to home, including in Kenton, Heaton, Jesmond and in parts of Gosforth with the agreement of Emergency Services. All these streets are very quiet, liveable streets that would be busy with traffic were it not for a few bollards. The picture below shows some examples.

Existing “modal filters” in Newcastle, allowing walking and cycling but not allowing cars or other vehicles.

Enabling more people to walk or cycle also helps get people out of cars that potentially could hold up emergency services vehicles. 

Although it is unlikely to be necessary, roads that are closed to motor traffic can be designed to allow continued use by emergency vehicles e.g. through the use of gates, or moveable bollards.

4. What if I need to use a car?

Vehicle access is retained for all properties and if driving you will be able to access the main road network for longer journeys.

These changes are intended to help keep the roads clearer for people who need to drive by enabling more people to leave their car at home and walk or cycle instead.

While some journeys require a vehicle, many don’t. The Department for Transport says that 42% of all journeys are under 2 miles. Many of those could be walked or cycled. A further 25% are between 2 and 5 miles and could easily be cycled by most people if good quality routes are available. 

Good quality routes would also help disabled cyclists. Transport for London estimated that 15% of disabled people in London actively cycled for transport in 2014, and groups like Wheels for Wellbeing are actively campaigning for better cycling routes to enable disabled people to cycle.  SPACE for Gosforth has assessed local cycling routes for inclusive cycling.

5. How will this impact journey times?

Some journeys might be slightly quicker or slightly slower as a result. Quicker journeys might include:

• Anyone travelling by car north, south or west from Garden Village will benefit because queues to exit Hollywood Avenue will be shorter. 
• Even journeys travelling east by car could be quicker as in the words of one resident “If I wanted to reverse off my drive, it could take me 10-15 minutes to actually get out.“
• For the same reason anyone using the number 33 bus will benefit because it will no longer be held up in traffic on Hollywood Avenue.
• People walking or cycling may be able to take faster, more direct routes as a result of the changes rather than longer detours to avoid busy roads.
• Some new cycling journeys might now be possible where previously they were not. Journeys of up to about two miles are frequently quicker by bike, especially in rush hour and when there is cycle parking close to your destination.
• Parents might also save time if quieter streets mean their children can travel independently rather than needing to be escorted due to traffic danger.

Google Maps journey times from Sandringham Road to Blue House roundabout showing the quickest driving route via Haddricks Mill Road

Some people may prefer to walk or cycle for some journeys even if it takes slightly longer than driving, to save money compared to driving or to get a bit of fresh air and light exercise. This might save time compared to driving somewhere and then doing separate exercise.

You may also want to try dividing your cost of travel (bus tickets, or the cost of buying and running a car) by the amount you are paid per hour, to work out the time it takes to earn that amount, which arguably should be part of any calculation of how much time is needed to travel somewhere.

Travel time = journey time + time to earn money to pay for travel.

The concept of “Effective Speed” goes even further, taking into account a wide range of time costs including for example time to fill a car with petrol or to arrange maintenance.

6. Will this lead to more traffic and pollution at South Gosforth?

A frequent concern when residential streets are closed for through traffic is that the displaced traffic will make nearby main roads more congested. In practice, although there will inevitably be a period of adjustment, it is unlikely to make much difference. 

When both Killingworth Road and Salters Bridge were shut traffic levels did not change much on Station Road. Pollution measured by Haddricks Mill roundabout actually reduced quite considerably, and measurements in Longbenton also showed a slight decrease. 

The graph below, showing traffic volumes on Station Road has been updated since our blog Roadworks, Air Quality and Disappearing Traffic to add measurements from 2018. We understand there is a perception that traffic increased in 2017 after the start of the Killingworth Road roadworks. This may be because traffic levels were actually suppressed during 2016 due to roadworks at the Salters Road / Great North Road junction. 

When Killingworth Road closed for road works, many people predicted that a large proportion of the 17,000 vehicles using Killingworth Road would re-route to the Great North Road. In fact traffic volumes on the Great North Road measured by Gosforth Academy were actually lower during the period when Killingworth Road was closed than before.

That’s not to say that traffic levels won’t change. There’s a natural variation from year to year under normal circumstances, and lack of public transport capacity is likely to have an effect as is (in the opposite direction) more people working from home. 

7. Will this fix dangerous driving on Hollywood Avenue?

Shortly after Salters Bridge was re-opened to through traffic in October 2019, the Council installed measuring equipment that found that the number of vehicles using the bridge had risen to 4,500 every day of which approximately 2,600 (18,200 per week) were exceeding the speed limit – set at 20mph to ensure the safety of people walking and cycling. They also found that around 1,000 vehicles per week were breaking the three tonne weight limit on Salters Bridge.

This is substantially less than previous measurements. In 2008, the Council measured over 8,000 vehicles a day using Hollywood Avenue. Possibly the lower number in October reflected the fact that the bridge had only just been re-opened and traffic had not then built back up to previous volumes. 

While it’s not possible to completely eliminate dangerous driving, residents reported during the closure for Killingworth Road that it was a safer, quieter, nicer place to live. Certainly the change proposed will stop the street being used by the 1000 heavy vehicles per week that ignored the Salters Bridge weight limit.

A large truck crosses Salters Bridge.

For more on current Hollywood Avenue road safety issues, take a look at the @WeLoveSalters twitter feed. 

8. Will more people walk and cycle?

Already, due to less traffic in the Covid-19 lockdown, people are walking and cycling more.

“The number of employees joining the Cycle to Work scheme has more than doubled“, “year-on-year sales of new bikes between £400 and £1,000 more than doubled in April” 

“Britain’s biggest cycle retailer [Halford] said sales of some cycling equipment had risen 500% at the start of the lockdown, while bike sales this month [May 2020] have been double normal levels.“

Government surveys report that “for distances of 1–2 miles over 60% of journeys were made by motor vehicle” and (via the British Social Attitudes Survey) that 10% strongly agree that “Many of the journeys of less than 2 miles that I now make by car I could just as easily walk” and that 38% agree or strongly agree that “Many of the journeys of less than 2 miles that I now make by car I could just as easily cycle.” The same survey also shows that 62% agree or strongly agree that “It is too dangerous for me to cycle on the roads”.

A recent YouGov survey found that 65% of people said they wanted streets redesigned to protect pedestrians and cyclists and that 51% would cycle more if this happened, while 33% said they would drive less if street layouts were changed.

This all suggests that many people are willing to change how they travel, if only the roads can be made safer for them to do so. Research on similar changes made in London shows that this isn’t just talk and people actually will change how they travel. After one year, people living in parts of London boroughs where changes were made were, on average, walking and cycling for 41 minutes a week more than those living in comparable areas.

To achieve a similar result to those measured in London might require further changes, such as in the example proposals we have previously described for east Gosforth, but these are a step in the right direction.

Residents’ feedback about Stoneyhurst Road provided to Newcastle City Council as part of its Local Cycling and Walking infrastructure plan (LCWIP) consultation

9. Will there be an economic impact? 

Investing in walking and cycling is generally good for local economies. Our blog Can protected cycle lanes be good for business? looks at the evidence. 

If people save money in how they travel, that’s more money that can be spent instead in local shops and cafes.

10. What about the weather?

Newcastle is one of the driest cities in the UK, and has a relatively mild climate ideal for walking and cycling. In our blog It’s not Amsterdam – it doesn’t rain as much for a start! we compared Newcastle’s weather to famous cycling cities Amsterdam and Copenhagen which are respectively wetter and colder than Newcastle. 

The other two bridges are Haldane Bridge in Jesmond and Argyle Street Bridge in Ouseburn ward. You can read the Council’s news article here. 

The post Enabling Safe Walking and Cycling via Local Bridges appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Route Review – North Bound

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

N1 Transition from Broadway Roundabout

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

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

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

N2 By the City of Newcastle Golf Club

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

N3 Green tarmac crossing the Golf Club entrance

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

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

N4 Pedestrian crossing and footbridge by the Three Mile Inn

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

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

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

N5 Bus stop opposite the Three Mile Inn

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

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

N6 Entrance to Bridge Park

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

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

N7 Petrol station exit

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

N8 Cycle lane next to Greystoke Park

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

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

N9 Entrance to Greystoke Park

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

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

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

N10 Entrance to Fencer Hill Park

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

N11 The approach to Polwarth Drive roundabout

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

N12 Approaching the pedestrian and cycle crossing

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

N13 Pedestrian and cycle crossing

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

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

N14 Bus stop next to Polwarth Drive

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

N15 Crossing Polwarth Drive

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

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

N16 Crossing Polwarth Drive

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

N17 The Great North Road service road entrance

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

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

N21 Bus stop bypass by Brunton Lane

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

Route Review – South Bound

S1 Bus stop opposite Brunton Lane

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

S2 Showing tactile paving to cross the cycle lane

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

S3 Newly planted trees next to the cycle lane

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

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

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

Bus stop and cycle lane in Haarlem, Netherlands

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

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

S5 Stone bus shelter and tactile paving

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

S6 New toucan crossing just north of Newlands Avenue

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

S7 Approaching Newlands Avenue

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

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

S8 Opposite Polwarth Drive

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

S9 Pedestrian and cycle crossing next to McCracken Close

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

S10 McCracken Close

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

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

S11 Raised cycle lane south of McCracken Close

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

S12 Entrance to Fencer Court

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

S13 South of Fencer Court

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

S14 Crossing the Ouseburn

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

S15 Toucan crossing next to Three Mile Inn

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

S16 Bus stop south of the Three Mile Inn

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

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

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

S17 Approaching the Broadway Roundabout

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

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

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

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

S18 Approaching the Broadway Roundabout

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Government and Council’s initial response to COVID-19 has been, quite rightly, to ensure people are safe and well, protect jobs and critical services, and to minimise the spread of the virus. Already by mid-April 2020 the virus has killed thousands of people in the UK alone, and left unchecked would kill many many more.

On March 23rd the Government announced lock-down, telling many businesses to close and no one to leave their house other than for a few essential reasons. Schools were also to close, other than for children of key workers, including those that work in the NHS, local and national government and key government services.

With schools closed and many of us now working from home, traffic levels in Newcastle have dropped substantially, as seen in the graph below from the Urban Observatory. Buses and Metro are running almost empty and instead many more people are out walking and cycling on local streets on their way to work, to shop for essentials or for exercise.

Air quality has started to improve (see the graph below for PM2.5 fine particulates on Gosforth High Street from the Urban Observatory). This would be beneficial for health under normal circumstances, but is especially so now as air pollution is correlated with a higher coronavirus death rate. According to a Harvard University study “an increase of only 1 μg/m³ in PM2.5 is associated with a 15% increase in the COVID-19 death rate.”

COVID-19 Transport Challenges

City Transport Planners no longer have to focus on managing high volumes of traffic through constrained urban junctions, or worry about vehicle delays and traffic jams.

The transport ‘behaviour change’ that Council Policy has long advocated for people to walk or cycle more to improve health has started to happen as traffic levels have declined, although speeding vehicles are still an issue.

People, especially doctors, nurses and other key workers still need to be able to travel though and, if walking or cycling, deserve to be protected from road danger. And the wider impact of how we travel on health needs to be considered to give us the best chance to beat the virus and minimise the burden on the NHS.

These all lead to some new questions for transport planners to answer, and in some cities they are already answering with physical changes being implemented.

1. How can key workers, and others that cannot work from home, travel to work given the recommendation to avoid public transport? This is especially important for those without access to a car.
2. How to ensure people can follow social distancing rules, in particular the 2m rule, and minimise transmission of the virus?
3. How to enable exercise with all its physical and mental health benefits to offset the impact of isolation, and reduce pressure on parks and open spaces?
4. How to minimise the number of traffic collisions to reduce non-COVID-19 pressure on the NHS?  (“Lowering the Baseline“)
5. How to get air pollution lower still, to minimise its impact on COVID-19 death rates and further reduce pressure on the NHS?
6. How to plan for when restrictions are eased but social distancing still means many fewer (perhaps only 20% or 1 in 5 of pre-virus) people can use public transport?

https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1250672383490473984?s=20

How are Cities Responding?

Newcastle City Council has responded with a very generous offer of free parking for key workers, potentially costing the Council millions of pounds in foregone charges, as it is not clear that this is something the Government will refund.

This would make no sense under normal circumstances but, now traffic volumes are much smaller, parking charges are not so important for managing traffic levels or air pollution.

To continue to support key workers we are extending free #parking in all of our on and off street spaces in #Newcastle while #coronavirus #COVID19 lockdown arrangements are in place.

Read all about it: https://t.co/mAWzCqzles pic.twitter.com/k2FraTVS7y

— NewcastleCityCouncil (@NewcastleCC) April 14, 2020

Berlin, on the other hand is massively expanding safe traffic-free bicycle lanes to enable doctors, nurses and other key workers to travel to work, making roads safer, reducing hospital admissions due to traffic collisions and helping to minimise air pollution. As well as helping those without access to a car, it gives an additional cheap and healthy option for those that do.

This also creates a further option for exercise and, if retained as lockdown is eased, enables others without access to vehicle a way of travelling longer distances within the city without having to use public transport.

A lot of cities are talking about making wider bike infra during the #coronavirus crisis. In Berlin, they're going ballistic doing it. @PBroytman sent me this amazing gallery: https://t.co/jYR1nqOL7T AMAZING. pic.twitter.com/wAwhNat0CV

— Mikael Colville-Andersen (@colvilleandersn) April 10, 2020

In Sydney, Australia, pedestrian crossings have been changed to give an automatic green light rather than needing to press a button. Surfaces that are touched frequently, like pedestrian crossing buttons, lift buttons, petrol pumps or door handles are a known transmission risk, so this has the potential to reduce transmission of the virus. This is also why it is important to wash hands when returning home and avoid touching your face.

https://twitter.com/andrewconstance/status/1241872088249413632

In the West Midlands, NHS workers have been offered free travel on buses and trams. This is clearly a welcome gesture for those that have no choice but to use local buses or trams but of limited use given Government guidance to avoid public transport if at all possible.

I am pleased to announce that all NHS staff can now travel for free on buses and trams in the West Midlands. NHS workers are putting their lives on the line day after day to tackle Coronavirus, and we should be doing all we can to support them.https://t.co/bphffqxknZ pic.twitter.com/9cmyAODeBj

— Andy Street (@andy4wm) April 2, 2020

On the Isle of Man, the maximum speed limit including on rural roads has been set to 40mph. Reducing the speed limit means that crashes are less frequent and, when they do happen, less severe. This again helps reduce hospital admissions due to traffic collisions.

Reducing speed limits is one of the suggestions made by the Lower the Baseline campaign as outlined in this British Medical Journal blog. Baseline, in this case, meaning the number of hospital admissions for reasons not related to COVID-19 so that the NHS can maximise resources available to treat people who do have COVID-19.

To ALL motorists on the Isle of Man.

Please be advised that as of midnight tonight, there will be a maximum speed limit of 40mph on all roads over 40mph. You should observe 20mph and 30mph signs as normal.#40ToSaveLives pic.twitter.com/2L3jXvOdBR

— TweetbeatIOM #RespectIOM (@TweetbeatIOM) March 27, 2020

A number of American cities have closed streets to through traffic, substantially reducing traffic levels on those streets but retaining access for vehicles that need it. In our blog Lots of children want to cycle to school, but hardly any do. How do we make space for child cycling in Gosforth? we shared UK research that showed this was one of the types of roads that parents would be happy to use cycling with their children.

Boston, Minneapolis, Oakland and other cities have temporarily banned through traffic on streets, giving pedestrians and cyclists extra elbow room during the coronavirus pandemic-Cities Close Streets to Cars, Opening Space for Social Distancing – The NYT https://t.co/D8DQSPIHqB

— IFPedestrians (@IFPedestrians) April 12, 2020

In  Hackney, East London, a similar approach is being taken showing that it is possible to implement access-only streets quickly in the UK.

#Hackney (#London) announces plans to "filter" streets, to protect people from rat running drivers & ease pressure on parks & open spaces during #COVID19 crisis – https://t.co/nZQc5kEHZy https://t.co/d8U3P4uNhp thanks @laura_laker

— IFPedestrians (@IFPedestrians) April 12, 2020

In Liverpool, the no-cycling restriction on the Queensway Tunnel is being relaxed so people who need to can use the route for essential journeys.

https://twitter.com/Merseytravel/status/1250077816345047042

In Barnes, in London, local businesses have taken the initiative to cone off part of the road for people to use on foot or when queuing for shops.

https://twitter.com/raphaelzy3/status/1248604675764436996

In Washington DC, cones and barriers have been used where there are narrow pavements, to allow people to pass without having to step into the road. Now there is much less vehicle traffic, it makes sense to reallocate space to where it is most needed.

https://twitter.com/CatrionaSwanson/status/1248876216758796289

Perhaps the two most impressive responses so far are from France and New Zealand.

In France, the government has confirmed that it is planning on cycling being the principal transport mode once restrictions are eased. Certainly if the vast majority of public transport users were to drive instead, as may well happen if cities do not intervene, then congestion, pollution, road danger and greenhouse gas emissions would all increase substantially. For the UK, that in addition to COVID-19 would place a substantial burden on the NHS.

https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1250401656870703104

In New Zealand, the government has confirmed a new ‘tactical urbanism’ fund. People have already changed how, when and why they travel as a result of COVID-19. This fund will support cities to implement changes that support these new patterns of movement.

Seizing an opportunity for rapid and radical change. Tactical urbanism in New Zealand to fund pop-up bike lanes, and widened sidewalks during lockdown https://t.co/4wxSvS7RcX

— Tom Rushby (@tom_rushby) April 14, 2020

These are all just examples of what cities are doing. We have included a longer list below and the American Pedestrian and Bicycle Information centre is also maintaining a list here. If you are on Twitter, you might want to follow @BrentToderian, @citycyclists and @MikeLydon, all of whom have shared multiple examples on their Twitter feeds.

What is perhaps most striking about these changes is how quick they have been implemented. Covid-19 is a genuine crisis, and in an emergency authorities need to react quickly expediting normal processes if required.

COVID-19 vs Air Pollution deaths

Many of the changes proposed above and in the longer list below will also support a reduction in air pollution, and as a result a reduction in people suffering and dying from conditions caused by air pollution. Reducing air pollution will also help reduce chronic respiratory and heart diseases that make it harder for someone to recover from COVID-19.

Right now, COVID-19 is the absolute priority and the graph below illustrate why. 40,000 deaths per year in the UK from air pollution equates to approximately 12 deaths per million per week vs 40 per week from COVID-19 and accelerating fast in week 7 in the USA.

Over time though, air pollution is still a substantial threat to health so Governments and Local Authorities need to ensure that in responding to COVID-19 they are not delaying further the urgent action that is required to address the threat from air pollution. It is likely that there will be further future COVID-19 outbreaks, after the one we are in now, and if air pollution can be cut that will help reduce death rates in those future outbreaks.

Source: https://twitter.com/VincentRK/status/1251140496870735872

WHO Technical Guidance: Moving around during the COVID-19 outbreak

Link: http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/health-emergencies/coronavirus-covid-19/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-technical-guidance/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-outbreak-technical-guidance-europe/moving-around-during-the-covid-19-outbreak

ACTIVE TRAVEL CHANGES

Sydney, Australia
Automated pedestrian crossings.
Source: https://twitter.com/andrewconstance/status/1241872088249413632

Queensland, Australia
Automated pedestrian crossings.
Source: https://twitter.com/TMRQld/status/1244746383262912519

Brussels, Belgium
Brussels adapts >100 traffic lights in favor of cyclists and pedestrians. Waiting times reduced by 20sec (average), some up to 40sec.
Source: https://twitter.com/dimitristrobbe/status/1246092862653153280

Brussels is putting massive plant pots in the streets to create extra space for walking and cycling
Source: https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1250157191778222080

Seattle, Washington, USA
Changing signal times to reduce wait times for people walking and cycling.
Source: https://twitter.com/seattledot/status/1248762875025465346

Bogotá, Columbia
22km of new in-street bikeways are being created “overnight,” by turning a lane for cars into two-way bike-lanes
Source: https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/1239581801279942659

Calgary, Canada
Testing weekend road closures on 6 major roads, disabled 50 pedestrian ‘beg buttons’
Source: https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/1244000505262563330

Berlin, Germany
Replacing car lanes with new cycle paths
Source: https://twitter.com/philipoltermann/status/1244189207867854848
Also: https://twitter.com/colvilleandersn/status/1248645263457214464

Bristol, UK
Replacing part of the road with a running lane (unofficial)
Source: https://twitter.com/DrLouisRice/status/1243913532544028679

New Zealand
Government fund for pop-up bike lanes and widened sidewalks
Source: https://twitter.com/tom_rushby/status/1250033398053289984

Denver, Colorado, USA
Some Denver streets will close to cars
Source: https://twitter.com/MikeLydon/status/1246500510116577281

Budapest, Hungary
Budapest to install bike lanes will help traffic during the pandemic, and encourage greater use of cycling as people start to return to work.
Source: https://twitter.com/PatrickDuce/status/1247807344517369856

Oakland, California, USA
74 miles of street closures
Source: https://twitter.com/ashk4n/status/1248442190017122304
Also (video): https://twitter.com/carltonreid/status/1249987195324239872

Brookline, Massachusetts, USA
Sidewalk widening
Source: https://twitter.com/MassDCR/status/1248670215300358152
Also: https://twitter.com/BlineTransport/status/1250512090617516032

Washington DC, USA
Wider sidewalks
Source: https://twitter.com/CatrionaSwanson/status/1248876216758796289

France
Bicycle to be the principal transport mode to enable social distancing
Source: https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1250401656870703104

Berkeley, California, USA
Repurposing streets for essential traffic only (unofficial)
Source: https://twitter.com/WalkBikeBerk/status/1250278699645067264

Liverpool, UK
To assist key workers making essential journeys cross river, the Queensway (Birkenhead) Tunnel will temporarily be open to cyclists
Source: https://twitter.com/Merseytravel/status/1250077816345047042

London, UK
TfL considers measures during lockdown to help physical distancing
Source: https://twitter.com/EmmaGibsonLTW/status/1250343251552305152

Hackney, London, UK
Filtered streets to protect people from rat running drivers and ease pressure on parks and open spaces.
Source: https://twitter.com/london_cycling/status/1250065125933043717

Burlington, Vermont, USA
17.5 miles of slow streets.
Source: https://twitter.com/MikeLydon/status/1250054691347738627

Manchester, UK
Filtered neighbourhood streets
Source: https://twitter.com/NQForum/status/1249315086684106752

Brighton and Hove, UK
Roads reclaimed by pedestrians and pedal power
Source: https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1249607388883279872

Montreal, Canada
A parking lane will be closed along a 2.7km stretch of Mont-Royal Avenue, to make it easier for people to walk to shopping.
Source: https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/1248076792683888640

North Vancouver, Canada
Road closed other than to cycles
Source: https://twitter.com/jordanback/status/1248670445743661057

Edmonton, Brampton, Montreal, Kitchener, Vancouver & Winnipeg, Canada
Bicycle / active transportation routes.
Source (see thread): https://twitter.com/g_meslin/status/1248434325692923904
Also (Vancouver): https://twitter.com/cfulgham/status/1248326654537195525

Barnes, UK
Pavement widening next to shops
Source: https://twitter.com/raphaelzy3/status/1248604675764436996

Austin, Texas, USA
Removing car lanes to create cycle lanes
Source: https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1248908428963131392

San Francisco
Rapid transformation to prioritise transit and cycling
Source: https://twitter.com/KCGrock/status/1248019256282738689

DesMoines, Iowa, USA
Opening streets around a park for social distancing.
Source: https://twitter.com/LenaGReynolds/status/1250127581535404037

Milan, Italy
Turning 35km of streets over to cyclists and pedestrians
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/21/milan-seeks-to-prevent-post-crisis-return-of-traffic-pollution

PRIVATE VEHICLE / PUBLIC TRANSPORT CHANGES

London, UK
Road user charging suspended
Source: https://twitter.com/TfL/status/1241085664050937860

Isle of Man, UK
Reduced speed limit to 40mph max.
Source: https://twitter.com/TweetbeatIOM/status/1243579094207520769

Vienna, Austria
Reduced speed limits, people asked to walk in the streets
Source: https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1248708352064045056

Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Free parking
Source: https://twitter.com/NewcastleCC/status/1250121831517958147

West Midlands, UK
Free bus and tram travel for NHS workers
Source: https://twitter.com/andy4wm/status/1245752164208836610

SUMMARY ARTICLES

Can we improve the NHS’s ability to tackle covid-19 through emergency public health interventions?
Source: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/03/24/can-we-improve-the-nhss-ability-to-tackle-covid-19-through-emergency-public-health-interventions/

TOP 10 WAYS cities can create NEW space on streets for people walking & biking close to home while #PhysicalDistancing during the #COVIDー19 pandemic, video by Brent Toderian
Source: https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/1248289951868801024

Op-Ed: Let’s Build a Network of ‘Quiet Streets’, John Massengale, StreetsBlogNYC
Source: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2020/03/30/op-ed-lets-build-a-network-of-quiet-streets/

To help get essential workers around, cities are revising traffic patterns, suspending public transit fares, and making more room for bikes and pedestrians. CityLab article
Source: https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2020/04/coronavirus-city-street-public-transit-bike-lanes-covid-19/609190/

World cities turn their streets over to walkers and cyclists
Source: https://twitter.com/dbornat/status/1248890401634779136

Coronavirus: Cycling numbers in Scotland jump during lockdown
Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52269964

Massive shift from public transport to private car in China as a result of Covid-19
Source: https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1248969813776633858

Financial Times: “The growth in demand for bikes reflects in part a reluctance among healthcare staff to commute on public transport services”
Source: https://twitter.com/citycyclists/status/1248899401248133120

Opinion: the magic of empty streets – New York Times
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/opinion/coronavirus-tips-new-york-san-francisco.html

Transport in the time of the Coronavirus crisis: what we need to do NOW, Road danger reduction forum
Source: https://rdrf.org.uk/2020/04/11/transport-in-the-time-of-the-coronavirus-crisis-what-we-need-to-do-now/

How Councils and Transport professionals can work on active travel to address the impact of Covid 19, Mark Strong.
Source: https://twitter.com/ibikebrighton/status/1249830229369069573

Tracker for how cities respond – Mike Lydon & ITDP US
Source: https://twitter.com/ITDPUS/status/1249788874118791168

US National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) COVID-19: Transportation Response Center

The post How are city transport planners responding to COVID-19? 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.

In recent years there has been remarkable political alignment from all parties about the need to prioritise and encourage walking and cycling. What has been largely lacking is a budget to go with it.

Just bear with me for a minute, and REALLY consider this — what if your city hall’s budget HAD to actually match your city’s vision? How would it change?#VisionaryBudgets pic.twitter.com/Gmz6maMrLb

— Brent Toderian (@BrentToderian) November 19, 2019

Where city planners like Brent Toderian say for a city’s vision you should look in its budget, much the same will be true for a country as a whole. That is especially the case in the UK where, under current rules, most funding for walking and cycling schemes is drip-fed from central government with a substantial lag between funding applications and work being started.

Cycling UK and Living Streets are both running campaigns to encourage people to write to candidates in their constituency to seek an increase in funding for both walking and cycling.

Whether you vote based on the parties’ proposals for walking and cycling or anything else is up to you of course. The BBC suggests that Brexit and Health are likely to be two of the most important issues people will use to decide who to vote for, although other polls also suggest that the Climate crisis will affect how the majority will vote in the UK election. Walking and cycling are of course important ways to improve health, and replacing local car journeys with walking and cycling will also help the effort to limit global warming.

MANIFESTO HIGHLIGHTS FOR WALKING AND CYCLING

The Liberal Democrats say they will “Introduce a nationwide strategy to promote walking and cycling, including the creation of dedicated safe cycling lanes, increasing spending per head five-fold to reach 10 per cent of the transport budget.” In the current Government’s Budget from 2018 the capital budget for transport projects was £8.5bn excluding network rail. 10% of that would be £850m per annum.

Labour say they will “increase the funding available for cycling and walking. We [Labour] will bring together transport and land-use planning to create towns and cities in which walking and cycling are the best choice: safe, accessible, healthy, efficient, economical and pollution-free. [Labour] will help children’s health and well-being by ensuring street designs provide freedom for physically active outdoor play and by introducing measures to ensure the zones around our schools are safer, with cleaner air.” Labour is proposing a capital budget of £4.7bn (£940m per annum) or £50 per person per head.

Conservatives say they will “support commuter cycling routes, so that more people can cycle safely to work and more families can go out together [and] will create a new £350 million Cycling Infrastructure Fund with mandatory design standards for new routes.” The £350m equates to £70m per year for five years, which according to the Guardian is less than is spent currently. By comparison, the Conservatives are proposing £28.8bn (>80 times as much) on building new roads. The design standards are already completed and should be published after the election whatever the outcome.

The Green Party says they will to spend “£2.5 billion a year on new cycleways and footpaths, built using sustainable materials, such as woodchips and sawdust” and aim to “civilise our streets by making Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (in which rat-running is blocked) the norm for residential areas and making 20 miles per hour the default speed limit.” The Dutch are currently trialing cycleways made from woodchips and resin in Emmen.

The Guardian has produced a more complete summary of which party’s general election pledges are most supportive of cycling.

For comparison, the Government has estimated that “the cumulative loss to the Exchequer from the successive fuel duty freezes from financial year 2011-12 to financial year 2018-19 is around £46.2bn”

Extracts of party manifestoes covering transport are below, including the Brexit Party.

Did you know walking for 20 minutes burns 100 calories?

There are many more benefits to walking—how many did you know? pic.twitter.com/UXxqYwDLCE

— GM Walking (@GmWalks) December 2, 2019

CLEAN AIR AND THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY

In 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that to keep the rise in global temperatures below 1.5C this century, emissions of carbon dioxide would have to be cut by 45% by 2030. The next UK government, which could last until 2024, will make the critical decisions that will determine if this cut will be achieved or not. Scientists have warned that many of those decisions will need to be taken before the end of 2020.

Carbon Brief have produced a comprehensive guide of what each of the parties are promising on climate change stating that the main parties all have commitments to net-zero carbon emissions: Conservatives (by 2050), Labour (by 2040 or earlier if possible), Liberal Democrat (2045 at the latest), Green (2030).

Despite having targets for net-zero emissions, Friends of the Earth’s analysis is that Conservative road building policies are likely to increase carbon emissions, while Labour and the Liberal Democrats are better but also fall short. Friends of the Earth have published the transport policies they say are needed to address the climate emergency.

Client Earth, an environmental charity that took the Government to court for failing to meet its air quality obligations , has produced a similar summary focused on what the parties are proposing that will help reduce air pollution.

Medact, a group for health professionals that campaigns for health and wellbeing, has done a further analysis covering Peace and Security, Planetary Health and Access to Healthcare.

DO ELECTION MANIFESTOES MATTER?

With recent news items focusing on promises of 50,000 additional nurses that turned out to include 18,500 existing nurses, or to build 40 new hospitals, that turned out to only be 6, it is easy to be sceptical of what the parties are promising.

Many communications seem to be as much intended to distract as inform, an approach called the ‘dead cat strategy‘ described here in Boris Johnson’s own words:

‘Let us suppose you are losing an argument. The facts are overwhelmingly against you, and the more people focus on the reality the worse it is for you and your case. Your best bet in these circumstances is to perform a manoeuvre that a great campaigner describes as “throwing a dead cat on the table, mate”.

‘That is because there is one thing that is absolutely certain about throwing a dead cat on the dining room table – and I don’t mean that people will be outraged, alarmed, disgusted. That is true, but irrelevant. The key point, says my Australian friend, is that everyone will shout “Jeez, mate, there’s a dead cat on the table!”; in other words they will be talking about the dead cat, the thing you want them to talk about, and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief.’

Recent elections have also shown a rise in micro-targeting, especially using Facebook, to share adverts that might appeal to specific groups but which because only few people see them aren’t subject to fact-checking or debate.

If you haven’t seen it, the Guardian’s article ‘Google-jacking’ and ‘Dead Squirrels’ is another interesting read on tactics employed by politicians to influence voters.

The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth.

— Garry Kasparov (@Kasparov63) December 13, 2016

That said, “A 2017 study in the American Journal of Political Science found that for 12 countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States) found that political parties fulfill their promises to voters to a considerable extent”. (Quote from the Wikipedia article on Election Promises.)

Of course, the past is not always a good guide to the future. By sharing extracts from manifestoes below and links to the full versions, we hope you will take the time to look and make up your own mind.

You might also wish to look at Full Fact, an independent fact-checking charity which has fact-checked and provided a thoughtful analysis of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat manifestoes and other promises and statements made to the media.

APPENDIX – TRANSPORT POLICIES FROM THE PARTY MANIFESTOES

Link to: Liberal Democrat, Labour, Conservative, Green Party, Brexit Party.

The ordering of extracts is based on the total number of votes received by each Party in the four Gosforth Council wards at the May 2019 local election.

Download the full manifesto from: https://www.libdems.org.uk/liberal-democrats-2019-manifesto

Improving Transport

Britain’s transport systems are broken. Commuting by rail is expensive, unreliable and unpleasant, and away from the major commuter routes, buses, trams and trains are so infrequent and expensive that cars are essentially made a necessity. This in turn has made air pollution – mostly caused by cars – one of the biggest causes of preventable illness in the UK, causing at least 40,000 premature deaths a year and costing the NHS £15 billion. And surface transport is now the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the UK, with almost no progress in reducing them since 1990. The UK’s share of international aviation and shipping emissions has risen by almost 80 per cent since 1990. Liberal Democrats will meet this challenge by:

• Investing in public transport, buses, trams and railways to enable people to travel more easily while reducing their impact on the environment.
• Placing a far higher priority on encouraging walking and cycling – the healthiest forms of transport.
• Accelerating the transition to ultra-low-emission transport – cars, buses and trains – through taxation, subsidy and regulation.

Together these steps will tackle the clean air crisis, meet the challenge of climate change, improve people’s health, stimulate local and regional prosperity and develop British zero-carbon industries, with benefits for jobs, growth and exports.

Clean and Green

To achieve our net-zero climate target by 2045, we aim to reduce emissions from surface transport to near zero; at the same time the transition to electric vehicles and from private to public transport will drastically cut air pollution. Emissions from the UK’s share of international aviation are much more difficult to tackle; we need to accelerate the development of new technologies and cut demand for flying, particularly from the 15 per cent of individuals who take 70 per cent of flights. We will:

• Accelerate the rapid take-up of electric vehicles by reforming vehicle taxation, cutting VAT on EVs to 5 per cent and increasing the rate of installation of charging points, including residential on-street points and ultra-fast chargers at service stations. We will ensure that, by 2030, every new car and small van sold is electric.
• Pass a Clean Air Act, based on World Health Organisation guidelines, enforced by a new Air Quality Agency. The Act will enshrine the legal right to unpolluted air wherever you live.
• Extend Ultra-Low Emission Zones to ten more towns and cities in England and
  ensure that all private hire vehicles and new buses licensed to operate in urban areas are ultra-low-emission or zero-emission vehicles by 2025; we will provide £2 billion to support this transformation.
• Shift more freight from road to rail, including electrifying lines leading from major ports as an urgent priority, and amend the current HGV road user levy to take account of carbon emissions.
• Support innovation in zero-emission technologies, including batteries and hydrogen fuel cells, supplementing government funding with a new Clean Air Fund from industry.
• Reduce the climate impact of flying by reforming the taxation of international flights to focus on those who fly the most, while reducing costs for those who take one or two international return flights per year, placing a moratorium on the development of new runways (net) in the UK, opposing any expansion of Heathrow, Gatwick or Stansted and any new airport in the Thames Estuary, and introducing a zero-carbon fuels blending requirement for domestic flights.

Reducing the Need for Car Travel

Liberal Democrats will invest in public transport, improving its reliability and affordability, reform the planning systems to reduce the need to travel and promote cycling and walking. We will:

• Give new powers to local authorities and communities to improve transport in their areas, including the ability to introduce network-wide ticketing, like in London.
• Implement, in cooperation with local authorities, light rail schemes for trams and tram-trains where these are appropriate solutions to public transport requirements.
• Restore bus routes and add new routes where there is local need; we will provide £4.5 billion over five years for this programme.
• Introduce a nationwide strategy to promote walking and cycling, including the creation of dedicated safe cycling lanes, increasing spending per head five-fold to reach 10 per cent of the transport budget.
• Build on the successful Local Sustainable Transport Fund established by the
  Liberal Democrats when in government, and workplace travel plans, to reduce the number of cars – particularly single-occupancy cars – used for commuting, and encourage the development of car-sharing schemes and car clubs and autonomous vehicles for public use.
• Amend planning rules to promote sustainable transport and land use.

Download the full manifesto from: https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/

Transport

Labour will build a sustainable, affordable, accessible and integrated transport system, founded on the principle that transport is an essential public service.

Cutting emissions will drive our transport policies. We will review public expenditure on transport to ensure that it promotes environmental sustainability and contributes to decarbonisation.

Bus services have been devastated by the Conservatives, despite carrying more people than any other mode of public transport. Women are especially dependent on buses, which also provide a lifeline for both older and younger people and for many economically disadvantaged groups.

Labour will ensure that councils can improve bus services by regulating and taking public ownership of bus networks, and we will give them resources and full legal powers to achieve this cost-effectively, thereby ending the race to the bottom in working conditions for bus workers. Where councils take control of their buses, Labour will introduce free bus travel for under-25s. We will increase and expand local services, reinstating the 3,000 routes that have been cut, particularly hitting rural communities.

Labour will deliver improvements for rail passengers by bringing our railways back into public ownership, using options including franchise expiry. This will enable us to make fares simpler and more affordable, rebuild the fragmented railways as a nationally integrated public service, cut the wastage of private profit, improve accessibility for disabled people, ensure safe staffing levels and end driver-only operation.

Our publicly owned rail company will steer network planning and investments. It will co-ordinate mainline upgrades, resignalling, rolling stock replacement and major projects. We will implement a full, rolling programme of electrification.

Our model will ensure continuity of skills, jobs and supply chain capacity to reduce costs, improve productivity and support the economic benefits of Labour’s Green Industrial Revolution.

We will introduce a long-term investment plan including delivering Crossrail for the North as part of improved connectivity across the northern regions. We will consult with local communities to reopen branch lines. We will also unlock capacity and extend high-speed rail networks nationwide by completing the full HS2 route to Scotland, taking full account of the environmental impacts of different route options. We will deliver rail electrification and expansion across the whole country, including in Wales. We will ensure that these major infrastructure projects are a model of good employment practice and pay due regard to the environmental impact.

We will promote the use of rail freight in order to reduce carbon emissions, air pollutants and congestion on the roads and expand the provision of publicly owned rail freight services.

We will increase the funding available for cycling and walking. We will bring together transport and land-use planning to create towns and cities in which walking and cycling are the best choice: safe, accessible, healthy, efficient, economical and pollution-free. We will help children’s health and well-being by ensuring street designs provide freedom for physically active outdoor play and by introducing measures to ensure the zones around our schools are safer, with cleaner air.

Our transport programme is focused on creating better, publicly accessible local transport systems. By improving public transport, Labour will help people to become less reliant on their cars, for our better health, for a cleaner environment and to improve quality of life in our towns and cities. The Conservatives have committed to ending new sales of combustion engine vehicles by 2040. Labour will aim for 2030.

We will position the UK at the forefront of the development and manufacture of ultra-low emission vehicles and will support their sale. We will invest in electric vehicle charging infrastructure and in electric community car clubs. We will accelerate the transition of our public sector car fleets and our public buses to zero-emissions vehicles.

We will reform taxi and private hire services, including a review of licensing authority jurisdictions, setting national minimum standards of safety and accessibility and updating regulations to keep pace with technological change and to close loopholes to ensure a level playing field.

We will adopt an ambitious Vision Zero approach to UK road safety, striving for zero deaths and serious injuries. Labour will invest to make our neglected local roads, pavements and cycleways safer for the everyday journeys of both drivers and vulnerable road users. We will review all tolled crossings.

Labour recognises the Davies Commission’s assessment of pressures on airport capacity in the South East. Any expansion of airports must pass our tests on air quality, noise pollution, climate change obligations and countrywide benefits. We will examine fiscal and regulatory options to ensure a response to the climate crisis in a way that is fair to consumers and protects the economy.

We will take action to end nationality-based discrimination in seafarer pay.

A Healthy Environment

Our polluted air contributes to over 40,000 premature deaths a year and poisons our environment, with further impacts on children’s health. But the Conservatives’ air-quality measures are so inadequate they have been found to be illegal.

Labour will introduce a new Clean Air Act, with a vehicle scrappage scheme and clean air zones, complying with World Health Organisation limits for fine particles and nitrous oxides.

In a further press release Labour have announced more detail about its walking and cycling plans.

The next Labour government will make England one of the most cycling and walking friendly places in the world.

Labour is announcing ambitious plans for a new ‘Healthy Streets Programme’ to make our towns and cities cleaner and greener to transform the environment, travel opportunities and quality of life across the country.

Labour’s ‘Healthy Streets’ programme will be modelled on the best towns in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. Like Amsterdam where 67% of trips are by foot or bike. Only 29% of trips are made by foot or bike in the UK.

Labour will deliver the boost to cycling and walking needed to urgently tackle the climate emergency, the local air pollution crisis and the epidemic of ill-health caused by a lack of investment in walking and cycling. Labour’s investment in walking and cycling will, for the first time, make active travel a genuine option for the many, not just the brave.

Labour will:

• Double cycling journeys by adults and children.
• Build 5000km of cycleways.
• Create safe cycling and walking routes to 10,000 primary schools.
• Deliver universal affordable access to bicycles and grants for e-bike purchase.
• Provide cycle training for all primary school children and their parents, plus extend training to secondary schools and make it available for all adults.

In the more detailed version of the press release, including notes to editors, it states

• The capital funding element of this announcement will cost £4.7bn in England, paid for from Labour’s Green Transformation Fund.
• Labour will ensure that annual funding for walking and cycling reaches £50 per person.
• In addition, Labour will also provide £2.5bn of revenue funding during its first term of government to expand Bikeability and Walk to School schemes, ‘social prescribing’ of cycling and a “A Cycling and Walking Social Investment Fund to support walking and cycling in left-behind areas.”

A further press release details proposals to cut the price of rail travel.

Download the full manifesto from: https://vote.conservatives.com/our-plan

A transport revolution

A key part of our plan to level up the UK’s cities and regions is to connect them. Leeds is the largest city in Western Europe without a light rail or metro system. And European cities are often more productive than our own in large part because they have better infrastructure.

We will connect our cities:

• We will build Northern Powerhouse Rail between Leeds and Manchester and then focus on Liverpool, Tees Valley, Hull, Sheffield and Newcastle.
• We will invest in the Midlands Rail Hub, strengthening rail links including those between Birmingham, Leicester, Nottingham, Coventry, Derby, Hereford and Worcester.
• We will also invest in improving train lines to the South West and East Anglia.
• We will extend contactless pay-as- you go ticketing to almost 200 more stations in the South East, meaning that 50 per cent of all rail journeys and almost all London commuter journeys can be completed using a contactless bank card.
• We will give city regions the funding to upgrade their bus, tram and train services to make them as good as London’s, with more frequent, better-integrated services, more electrification, modern buses and trains and smart ticketing – such as the vision proposed by Andy Street for the West Midlands.
• The railways need accountability, not nationalisation. So we will end the complicated franchising model and create a simpler, more effective rail system, including giving metro mayors control over services in their areas.
• We will make a £28.8 billion investment in strategic and local roads. We will invest £1 billion in completing a fast-charging network to ensure that everyone is within 30 miles of a rapid electric vehicle charging station. We will consult on the earliest date we can phase out the sale of new conventional petrol and diesel cars, while minimising the impact on drivers and businesses.
• We will require that a minimum service operates during transport strikes. Rail workers deserve a fair deal, but it is not fair to let the trade unions undermine the livelihoods of others.
• HS2 is a great ambition, but will now cost at least £81 billion and will not reach Leeds or Manchester until as late as 2040. We will consider the findings of the Oakervee review into costs and timings and work with leaders of the Midlands and the North to decide the optimal outcome.
• Connectivity is not just about the UK’s great cities. To help communities across the country, we will restore many of the Beeching lines, reconnecting smaller towns such as Fleetwood and Willenhall that have suffered permanent disadvantage since they were removed from the rail network in the 1960s.
• We will invest in superbus networks with lower fares – flat fares in urban areas – and increased frequency. We will keep bus fares low, bring back and protect rural routes, and speed up your journeys. We will invest in electric buses, developing the UK’s first all- electric-bus town.
• We will launch the biggest ever pothole-filling programme as part of our National Infrastructure Strategy – and our major investment in roads will ensure new potholes are much less likely to appear in the future.
• We will support commuter cycling routes, so that more people can cycle safely to work and more families can go out together. We will create a new £350 million Cycling Infrastructure Fund with mandatory design standards for new routes. We will extend Bikeability – cycling proficiency training – to every child. And we will work with the NHS to promote cycling for healthier living.
• Parliament has voted in principle to support a third runway at Heathrow, but it is a private sector project. It is for Heathrow to demonstrate that it can meet its air quality and noise obligations, that the project can be financed and built and that the business case is realistic. The scheme will receive no new public money. More broadly, we will use new air traffic control technology to cut the time aircraft spend waiting to land, reducing delays, noise nuisance and pollution. We will also build on Britain’s pioneering work in electric and low-carbon flight.

Stewards of our environment

Our Environment Bill will guarantee that we will protect and restore our natural environment after leaving the EU. Because conservation has always been at the very heart of Conservatism.

• We will set up a new independent Office For Environmental Protection and introduce our own legal targets, including for air quality.

Download the full manifesto from: https://campaigns.greenparty.org.uk/manifesto/

The Green New Deal for transport

Our transport system is built on fossil fuels. As well as destabilising our climate, this reliance traps us into stressful, unhealthy and expensive forms of travel. Car dependency contributes to congestion, road danger and air pollution whilst reducing physical activity.

The Green New Deal will revolutionise our transport system by ending dependence on carbon, and investing instead in alternatives that work for better for the climate and for people. This means more reliable and affordable trains, electric buses and trams, and better options for cycling and walking.

From new trains and targeted fare reductions, to rapidly expanding bike hire schemes, we think it’s time to transform the way the UK moves.

Our Green New Deal for transport will invest in public transport, walking and cycling so wherever people live they are not forced to use a car, by:

• Spending £2.5 billion a year on new cycleways and footpaths, built using sustainable materials, such as woodchips and sawdust.
• Making travelling by public transport cheaper than travelling by car, by reducing the cost of travelling by train and bus. Coach travel will also be encouraged, with new routes for electric coaches provided across the country.
• Creating a new golden age of train by opening new rail connections that remove bottlenecks, increase rail freight capacity, improve journey times and frequencies, enhance capacity in the South West, Midlands and North, and connect currently unconnected urban areas. We would also look, where possible, to re-open closed stations. These rail improvements will benefit from funding switched from the damaging HS2 scheme, which we will cancel (see ‘Ending wasteful spending’ section below for more details).
• Electrifying all railway lines that connect cities, improving punctuality.
• Creating a government-owned rolling stock company which would invest in a fleet of new electric trains to run on newly electrified lines.
• Giving responsibility for running short-distance passenger rail franchises to councils, or groups of councils that come together to work on local transport. This will give local communities a greater say in the running of the rail services they rely on. We will bring all railways back into public ownership over ten years.
• Ensuring good railway connections with all ports to enable more freight between ports and inland terminals to be carried on rail. We will invest in additional freight routes resulting in the majority of long-distance freight switching from road to rail.
• Giving all local authorities control over bus services (as London currently has) and supporting local authorities to restore lost bus routes and open new ones. Local authorities serving urban areas will be encouraged to explore tramways as an additional public transport option.
• Providing more bus priority measures on the roads to improve punctuality.
• Funding local authorities to improve the appearance and facilities of
  bus stops, bus stations and train stations, to make them more user friendly and convenient for both passengers and transport staff. This includes the provision of more public toilets, and ensuring full accessibility for disabled people.
• Apply a Carbon Tax on all fossil fuels, as outlined above in the ‘Green New Deal for energy’ section, which will increase the cost of petrol, diesel and shipping fuel, as well as on aviation fuel for domestic flights. Domestic flights will also lose their VAT exemption and there will be an additional surcharge on domestic aviation fuel to account for the increased warming effect of emissions release at altitude. We will lobby > against the international rules that prevent action being taken to tax international aviation fuel.
• Ban advertising for flights, and introduce a Frequent Flyer Levy to reduce the impact of the 15% of people who take 70% of flights. This Frequent Flyer Levy only applies to people who take more than one (return) flight a year, discouraging excessive flying.
• Stop the building of new runways and all increased road capacity, saving thousands of acres of countryside every year and protecting people from the harm of increased air pollution and traffic danger.
• End the sale of new petrol and diesel fuelled vehicles by 2030. Over the next ten years we will ease this transition by incentivising the replacement of diesel and petrol vans, lorries and coaches with electric vehicles. Our priority is reducing overall mileage and the number of vehicles on our roads these further measures will ensure that the vehicles still on our roads in 2030 create the minimum of pollution. Even electric vehicles pollute, so they represent an improvement on the current situation, not a solution in themselves.
• Create a network of electric vehicle charging points across the country, by requiring their construction through the planning system and encouraging the private sector to deliver them. We will ensure that these charging points are located in public places, and do not take up pavement and cycling space. We will require all existing petrol stations and motorway service stations to offer electric vehicle charging points by 2025.
• Civilise our streets by making Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (in which rat-running is blocked) the norm for residential areas and making 20 miles per hour the default speed limit. These changes would reduce traffic, carbon emissions and danger to people walking and cycling. They would restore our streets to all people. They would also form part of a wider commitment to the core principle of the Vision Zero campaign – that there should be no fatalities or serious injuries as a result of road traffic collisions.
• Make 40 miles per hour the default speed limit in non-residential areas except on major roads.
• Ensure through the planning system that all new housing is served by high quality walking and cycling routes and much improved bus, tram and local rail services. New residents must not be forced into car use.
• Incentivise changes to travelling behaviour by promoting more stay at home working (with working hours’ heating, electricity and Wi-Fi costs reimbursed by employers for low income workers working from home), more business teleconferencing, more local work station hubs and more car club schemes. We will also encourage more domestic holiday travel, through removing VAT from UK hotel and holiday home stays and attractions.

Download the full manifesto from: https://www.thebrexitparty.org/contract/

The Brexit Party pledges include:

• Scrapping HS2
• Investing “at least £50bn in local road and rail schemes.”
• Free Wi-Fi on all public transport.

The post General Election 2019 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.