SPACE for Gosforth

Movement Strategy response

SPACE for Gosforth — Sun, 01 Dec 2024 17:21:34 +0000

In November Newcastle City Council consulted on its proposed Movement Strategy, setting out the Council’s vision, guiding principles and actions for a sustainable, inclusive and efficient transport network for Newcastle. This blog is SPACE for Gosforth’s response to that consultation.

While the Movement Strategy consultation is now closed, you can still comment on the NE Local Transport Plan up to 26 January 2025. We will write more about that in the coming weeks.

You can access the Council’s consultation material for the Movement Strategy on the Lets Talk Newcastle website.

Dear Newcastle City Council,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Movement Strategy. This letter sets out our group’s response.

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

Key Points

Newcastle is being outcompeted and outperformed by other UK and European cities both in terms of vision for transport, and in pace of implementation. We hope this movement strategy will rectify this and place Newcastle as a leader in sustainable transport.
Newcastle City Council need to demonstrate how the Movement Strategy will make a difference given the many consultations already completed and given adopted Council policy already contains many of the same objectives. For example, “Planning for the Future Core Strategy and Urban Core Plan” was adopted by Newcastle and Gateshead Council on 26 March 2015, and contains substantially similar objectives for transport including (i) make Gateshead and Newcastle accessible to all, (ii) achieve a shift to more sustainable modes of travel, and (iii) reduce carbon emissions from transport. What will the Movement Strategy allow the Council to do that it is not already able to?
The strategy should be a strategy for streets rather than just movement. Roads aren’t only ed for movement. They are also used to shop, meet, play and socialise amongst other uses. The strategy also needs to set out how different uses will be prioritised on different types of street – not one size fits all.
The strategy needs to set targets as well as direction to confirm the scale of ambition. This should include a target for zero deaths and serious injuries, and also set out how, for transport, the city will achieve its target of Net Zero by 2030.
The Council needs an approach to consultation for individual schemes to ensure people understand the benefits and trade-offs, while countering misinformation.

Transport Priorities

We support the listed priorities with one proposed change and the following additional comments.

Improving public transport

We support improving public transport in the context of the hierarchy of sustainable modes of transport set out in the Future Core Strategy (paragraph 11.12), and The Greener Journeys ‘decision tree’ included in the NE Transport Plan (figure 1 page 8). To align with existing Council and regional policy we suggest both are included in the new Movement Strategy.

Improving walking and wheeling opportunities

This needs to include effective maintenance, including winter maintenance, and keeping pavements clear e.g. from pavement parking.

Expanding cycling infrastructure

Cycling is the mode of transport least catered for currently in Newcastle, and therefore has the greatest potential to enable more people to travel safely and sustainably with minimal cost outlay. To achieve this, routes need to be safe, direct and designed in accordance with LTN1/20 to be useable by all ages and abilities.

Expanding electric vehicle infrastructure

This should not reduce space for people walking or cycling, and should include electric bikes and electric public transport (e.g. Metro, buses, trams and scooters) as well as cars.

Replacing vehicle journeys with cycling or public transport will achieve a much fast rate of emissions reduction than replacing ICE vehicles with electric ones.

Improving air quality

UK Legal limits need to be achieved in the shortest possible timescales, with a further target date set to achieve WHO limits.

Improving safety for all road users

We support safe pedestrian and cycling environments. The Council should target zero deaths and serious injuries on the city’s roads.

Improving accessibility for disabled people

All modes of transport including walking, cycling and public transport, should be accessible and safe for all ages and abilities.

Reducing traffic congestion

We suggest ‘Reducing traffic congestion’ is replaced by ‘Reducing traffic’ to align with the proposed action to ‘reduce private vehicle use’. This will have the desired effect of reducing congestion, as well as reducing air pollution and carbon emissions.

Seeking to reduce congestion by adding capacity to roads or junctions will quickly lead to additional ‘induced traffic’ cancelling out any expected benefit.

Delays to people walking and cycling should also be minimised.

Our suggestions for additional priorities are “good quality places”, “enabling children to travel independently”, and ‘achieving the net zero target’.

The strategy should be a strategy for streets rather than just movement. Roads are not only used for movement. Gosforth High Street, for example, is a destination and should be designed as such and not as a traffic-thoroughfare. This aligns with the proposed action ‘enhancing Newcastle’s public spaces’.

Enabling children to travel independently and safely on foot or by cycling to school, especially High School children who are expected to travel independently over quite long distances, should also be a priority. The recent adjudication on Gosforth Academy admissions stated that “The youngest pupils at GA (Gosforth Academy) are in Year 9; they are 13 years old and therefore most, if not all should be able to travel to school unaccompanied”, also noting that the shortest walking route between Gosforth Academy and Great Park Academy is 2.6 miles.

Streets are also used by younger children for play, and it should be safe for them to do so ideally via permanent interventions to reduce traffic, or via “Play Streets”. If the Council will implement Play Streets again in future it will need to ensure that applying for Play Streets is as simple and as straightforward as possible. In the past, the Newcastle scheme compared poorly with the neighbouring North Tyneside scheme in this respect.

Achieving the net zero target is not in the Council’s list of priorities but should be. Achieving the Council’s 2030 net zero target will be a significant factor in deciding which schemes to prioritise.

Key Principles

We support the proposed principles with the following additional comments.

Net Zero Newcastle

This should explicitly refer to Newcastle City Council’s 2030 Net Zero target. This requires a reduction in fossil fuel powered vehicles as well as a range of sustainable options for how to travel.

Sustainable Growth

We suggest ‘sustainable access’ rather than ‘essential access’.

Healthier, Active and Safe

This should enable, rather than just encourage, active travel.

The Council should set a target to achieve zero deaths and serious injuries on the roads.

Inclusive, Connected and Efficient

Walking, cycling and public transport should be actively prioritised because they are the most efficient forms of transport for urban areas as they require the least space per road user. Council design standards should ensure that pavements and cycle routes are usable by all ages and abilities.

Our suggestion for an additional Principle is “Vision Zero”.

One of the proposed principles is ‘healthier, active and safe’ but we think safety is sufficiently important that it should be a separate principle to apply to all modes of transport, not just active travel.

Vision Zero is based on the principle that “it can never be ethically acceptable that people are killed or seriously injured when moving within the road transport system”, or in other words “Life and health can never be exchanged for other benefits within the society”.

To be most effective, this should focus on addressing, and ideally removing, the sources of danger, e.g. using the hierarchy of hazard controls. It should emphasise that responsibility for safety is shared by transport planners and road users, rather than being solely the responsibility of road users.

It should also involve a commitment to the consistent use of best practice standards such as LTN1/20 on all road schemes, not just those with specific active travel funding.

Actions

We support the proposed actions with the following additional comments.

Net Zero Newcastle – Making our transport system climate-resilient

We suggest adding “Ensuring the winter maintenance plan enables people to continue to walk and cycle safely during bad weather.”

Net Zero Newcastle – Promoting low-emission vehicles

“Ensuring freight and delivery services use ultra-low emission vehicles” should also include enabling the use of cargo bikes for freight as an alternative to small vans.

Net Zero Newcastle – Encouraging alternatives to driving

This should refer to the hierarchy of sustainable transport and include planning for micro-mobility e.g. eScooters, to anticipate future trends that may emerge between now and 2030.

We support the use of bus lanes in the context of that hierarchy. I.e. to enable buses to bypass queues caused by high traffic volumes, but not where this would cause a conflict with or safety issue for people walking or cycling.

If the purpose is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, then this also needs to include specific measures to reduce private vehicle use e.g. by reducing or removing vehicular traffic travelling through residential areas, as more use of public transport, walking or cycling is not sufficient by itself to reduce carbon emissions.

Sustainable Growth – Improving access to opportunities

“Creating a high-quality walking and cycling network connecting neighbourhoods and shopping areas” should include maintenance i.e. “Creating and maintaining a high-quality walking and cycling network connecting neighbourhoods and shopping areas”.

For shopping areas like Gosforth High Street that are made up of multiple destinations (the individual shops and services), this should include the best possible access to each individual shop/destination.

Walking and cycling networks should also connect to schools, parks and workplaces as committed to in the Reframing Transport report, including “hard-to-reach” workplaces.

The Council will need to maintain its Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) to ensure that space on main roads planned to be used for walking and cycling is reserved for that purposed and not used for alternative purposes.

The networks will also need to link with neighbouring authorities to achieve the NE-wide regional active travel network referred to in the draft NE Transport Plan.

Sustainable Growth – Enhancing Newcastle’s public spaces

It should be possible to travel to and access public spaces on foot, by bike and by public transport.

We note that the 2015 Future Core Strategy and Urban Core Plan already has a developed policy for walking and cycling in the city centre.

In line with the local plan, further pedestrianisation should be planned for the city centre specifically, but this should not be implemented in a way that causes severance for people who need to travel across the city by bike or eScooter.

Roads that function as public spaces should be specifically designated in the Local Plan. This should include all District Centres including Gosforth High Street.

Guidelines for accessibility should cover walking, cycling and public transport, and the Council should adopt national or regional guidance where available (as it has already done with LTN1/20) rather than expend limited resources creating new guidance specifically for Newcastle.

Sustainable Growth – Ensuring sustainable growth

“Promoting car-free lifestyles and reducing car ownership” should be rewritten as “Enabling car-free lifestyles and reducing car dependency”, as there is no point promoting something without it first being enabled.

Any review of roadside space should take account of future plans for Newcastle’s cycle network.

Rather than “reviewing vehicle access in high pedestrian or cycling areas” the Council should be proactively looking for opportunities to remove barriers to walking and cycling. This should include action to substantially reduce the number of vehicles using roads that are not part of the distributor network.

Healthier, Active and Safe – Making streets safer

The first bullet point should be rewritten as “Implementing schemes to make streets safer and reduce the number and severity of collisions”.

In the second bullet replace “access” with “accessibility” i.e. “Ensuring all street investments improve safety and accessibility”.

We support road safety training for school children, but training and education should, in line with the updated Highway Code, also focus on those most likely to cause danger to others.
Residential streets i.e. roads not defined as primary or secondary distributors, should be sufficiently safe for younger children to travel around their local area, meet friends and play outside.

Add “Working with the Police and Crime Commissioner to target the most dangerous behaviours.”

This should also include reference to proven safety approaches such as lowering speed limits, low-traffic neighbourhoods and school-streets.

Healthier, Active and Safe – Encouraging daily physical activity

“Connecting communities, schools, and shopping areas with a network of walking and cycling routes” should not be limited to “low-traffic areas.” The greatest protection is needed in areas with high levels of traffic. Routes should also be safe for all ages and abilities, direct, and for cycling meet the standards set out in LTN1/20.
Streets also have an important use to enable younger children to play and be active. This is currently not the case.

According to the Director of Public Health Report 2023 fewer than 4 in 10 (39%) children and young people in Newcastle aged 5 to 18 years meet the UK Chief Medical Officers’ physical activity guidelines while 8% of children in Reception and 42% of children in Year 6 are classed as overweight or obese.

Healthier, Active and Safe – Prioritising clean air

Electric vehicles do not have tailpipe emissions, but they do not eliminate pollution. Not least, they still cause air and water pollution from tyre and brake dust.

Air pollution limits should be achieved in the shortest possible timescales (as required by UK law), with a target date set to achieve more stringent WHO limits.

Inclusive, Connected and Efficient – Designing for all

This should include ensuring pavements and the cycle network are usable by all ages and abilities.

Also add “Well maintained pavements and cycle lanes clear of obstructions such as EV charge points and pavement parking”.

Narrowing junctions is a relatively cheap way to improve safety and reduce crossing distances for people walking. We would welcome the Council’s reconsideration of pedestrian priority on side street crossings on Gosforth High Street.

Crossings should minimise wait time for pedestrians, especially during poor weather.

Inclusive, Connected and Efficient – Improving local connections

Add “Reducing severance” e.g. by improving pedestrian and cycle crossings over the Urban Motorway, Metro, River Tyne and the A1 Western bypass.

“Implementing traffic reduction schemes in neighbourhoods” should include the use of low traffic neighbourhoods to prevent non-local traffic using neighbourhood streets as a short cut to avoid queues on the main road network.

Inclusive, Connected and Efficient – Reducing private vehicle use

This is likely to be a significant challenge given widespread EV adoption is likely to reduce the cost of driving substantially and therefore lead to a substantial increase in traffic.

This should include the most effective measures to reduce vehicle use: removing through traffic in residential areas; and reallocating road space on main roads to provide protected cycling facilities and no-car lanes.

Final Comments or Suggestions

The strategy needs to prioritise urgent action now rather than blue-sky policy making with no real-world impact. Although substantial progress has been made with the implementation of the CAZ, the city is long-overdue to meet legal air quality targets and only has five years left before the Council’s 2030 Net Zero target.
A strategy needs leadership willing to implement the strategy, not give up at the first sign of disagreement. There’s no political choice that has unanimous backing, and that is as true for transport as every other domain.
The strategy should include a plan for engaging with residents in a way that allows for views to be sought but also ensures schemes can be implemented quickly so the benefits are achieved as soon as possible. This should include rapidly challenging false narratives and incorrect information e.g. false claims such as LTNs causing substantial extra traffic on main roads or increasing emergency vehicle response times (neither of which have happened).
Likewise, the strategy needs to include a plan for how residents’ comments will be assessed and acted on to enable policy outcomes to be achieved. This should ensure comments with good evidence are weighted more highly than spurious claims, and it should minimise status quo and sampling biases.
If the plan is to replace existing policy, e.g. in the DAP or Reframing transport, it should ensure the new strategy is even more ambitious and include any actions from the DAP and other policy documents that are still relevant. If applicable, it should also explicitly state which policies it replaces. A list of existing Council transport-related policy is provided in Appendix A.
Road safety should be non-negotiable, and not tradeable for other benefits (Vision Zero). The Council should consider how both Councillors and Council officers can increase residents’ understanding of Vision Zero and why it is important.
The strategy should commit meeting and exceeding the objectives set out in the Government’s Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) guidance, including the aim for cycling that adjacent routes within the network should not be any more than 400m apart.
Actions that support all principles should be given the highest priority, for example a safe accessible, all age and ability cycle network would improve safety, improve health, cut emissions and pollution. Likewise, actions that have a negative impact on multiple objectives e.g. increasing road capacity for vehicles, should not be pursued.
The strategy needs to include firm metrics for how progress will be measured and reported, with time-bound targets. The consultation should take account of polling and consultations already completed. Some examples are given in Appendix B.

Thank you again for this opportunity to provide input to the Movement Strategy and we look forward to the final report.

Yours faithfully,

SPACE for Gosforth

Appendix A Existing Council Policy on Transport

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

Local Plan
• Core Strategy and Urban Core Plan policies including CS13, UC5 to UC12 and Newcastle Sub-Areas and Site-Specific Policies
• Development and Allocations Plan policies DM10 – DM14
• Addendum to 2015 NCC adoptable design standards to include amended cycling infrastructure to comply with LTN 1/20

Council approved plans and targets
• Transport changes to help make neighbourhoods clean, green, and safe (June 2021) including the Transport Vision for a Healthy Newcastle, the Draft Newcastle LTN Plan and the Newcastle Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan
• Reframing Transport (October 2022) including adoption of LTN1/20
• The Net Zero Action Plan, 2030 target, transport policies and actions
• World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended air pollution limits for PM2.5 to be achieved by 2030 (adopted by Newcastle City Council March 2019).
• The Clean Air Zone and other transport-related actions set out in the annual Air Quality Annual Status Reports
• The Winter Maintenance Plan
• Blue Green Newcastle
• The Ouseburn initiative, including the Ouse Burn Way

Regional Policy approved / adopted by Newcastle City Council via NECA.
• NE Transport Plan (2021) including the target for no deaths or serious injuries by 2025
• NE Active Travel Strategy (2023)
• NE Bus Service Improvement Plan (2023)
• NE Rail and Metro Strategy (2022)
• Zero Emission Vehicle Strategy (2022)

Appendix B Examples of representative surveys and already completed consultations

• Active Travel England recently confirmed 85% of people in England support active travel and would like to do more.
• The Bikelife Tyneside survey that showed “72% think that more cycle tracks along roads physically separated from traffic and pedestrians would be useful to help them cycle more” and the same number also think “space should be increased for people socialising, cycling and walking on their local high street”.
• The Council’s Local Plan 2040 consultation where ‘developing a sustainable transport network’ was the ambition that mattered to the most people, and the top answer to what would make it easier to use more active travel options was ‘make active travel routes safer’.
• Newcastle City Council’s 2019 LCWIP consultation, and Streets for People consultations.

The post Movement Strategy response appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Movement Strategy – Respond by 29 November 2024

SPACE for Gosforth — Thu, 07 Nov 2024 08:45:08 +0000

Flooding in Newcastle October 2021

Newcastle City Council is consulting on a new Movement Strategy policy and is asking for comments by 29 November 2024.

You can complete the online questionnaire here, and there is also an information brochure.

It asks residents and organisations to judge different objectives from ‘not important’ to ‘very important’. Objectives include improving different types of transport, EV charging, safe, accessibility, air quality and congestion. There are also free text fields where you can add your own thoughts.

According to the Council, the final strategy will be presented to Cabinet in “Spring 2025” after which it will develop an implementation plan. No timescales are given for the implementation plan, or for any schemes that may be proposed as a result of the plan.

This blog sets out some thoughts on how to respond, but first please forgive us for having a bit of a rant. Normally, we try to address issues calmly, but with this consultation we are feeling somewhat differently. This is why:

What does SPACE for Gosforth think?

You would be forgiven for having a sense of deja vu.

Newcastle City Council has already consulted on transport policy via its Development and Allocations Plan and its 2040 Local Plan early engagement consultation, transport-related air quality via the Clean Air Zone consultation, walking and cycling via its LCWIP consultation, and Streets for People consultations in Jesmond, Fenham and Heaton. It has an air quality plan action plan, a Net Zero transport plan, and a strategy for safer, cleaner, greener neighbourhoods set out in the Reframing Transport report approved by Council Cabinet.

Transport North East, which was made up of seven north east authorities including Newcastle consulted on its North East Transport Plan, the North East Active Travel Strategy, its Making the Right Travel Choice strategy, and has also asked for feedback via a Walking and Cycling Survey. The new Mayoral Authority has just launched a separate consultation on an update of the NE Transport Plan, which the tweet below refers to.

https://twitter.com/NorthEast_CA/status/1853430338824912909

Meanwhile, legal air quality limits that should have been met by 2005 have still not been achieved, minimal progress has been made to decarbonise transport since Newcastle City Council’s 2019 declaration of a Climate Emergency (target net zero by 2030), nor has there been any progress to cut road deaths and serious injuries (target “no fatalities or serious injuries on the regions’ road network by 2025″). Experimental schemes to cut traffic in local areas have been removed, the school streets programme under-delivered and has now been stopped, and the Council abandoned its commitment to the LTN1/20 cycling safety standard at one of the locations it is needed most (Gosforth High Street).

Now, the Council asks us whether Newcastle’s transport networks should prioritise cutting air pollution, carbon emissions or road collisions up to 2045, when by 2045 they should (according to the Council’s current targets) have already been net zero, compliant with legal limits on air pollution, and without death or serious injury for at least 15 years.

What confidence should we have that any new plan will deliver on any of these new objectives when it fails to acknowledge existing policy or objectives, and when the (now former) Cabinet lead for transport dismissed residents supporting safer streets as ‘the cycle lobby‘?

City Centre Traffic – priority to vehicles

Rant Over

That all said, this consultation is part of the process to create the new Movement Strategy, and if you don’t respond your view won’t be taken into account – so please do complete the Council’s survey.

Most of the consultation asks you to select an option from “very important” / “strongly support” to “not important” / “strongly oppose”, and there’s little to disagree with. It’s a bit like asking do you want cake, biscuits and ice cream? And, unlike in the real world, you can have all of them without having to choose.

There are four free text questions where you can fill in your own thoughts. Our suggestions for additional priorities, principles and actions are below.

1. Are there any other priorities you think should be included?

Our suggestions for additional priorities are “good quality places”, “enabling children to travel independently”, and ‘achieving the net zero target’.

The strategy should be a strategy for streets rather than just movement. Roads aren’t only used for movement. Gosforth High Street, for example, is a destination and should be designed as such and not as a traffic-thoroughfare. This aligns with the proposed action ‘enhancing Newcastle’s public spaces’.

We also suggest ‘Reducing traffic congestion’ is replaced by ‘Reducing traffic’ to align with the proposed action to ‘reduce private vehicle use’. This will reduce congestion, as well as reducing air pollution and carbon emissions.

Football fans leaving St James Park after a match

2. If you have any suggestions for additional principles that should be included in the Movement Strategy, please include them here.

Our suggestion is “Vision Zero”.

One of the proposed principles is ‘healthier, active and safe’ but we think safety should be a separate principle to apply to all modes of transport, not just active travel.

This should focus on addressing the sources of danger, e.g. using the hierarchy of hazard controls, and emphasises that responsibility for safety is shared by transport planners and road users, rather than being solely the responsibility of road users.

It should also involve a commitment to the consistent use of best practice standards such as LTN1/20.

Traffic on the Tyne Bridge – how should the Tyne Bridge be used in future?

3. If there are any additional actions you think we should take to improve transport in Newcastle please tell us about them here:

Our suggestions are:

In Net Zero Action 2 – making Our Transport System Climate Resilient, include “Ensuring the winter maintenance plan allows people to continue to walk and cycle safely during bad weather.”
In Net Zero Action 2 – Promoting low-emission vehicles, ensuring freight and delivery services use ultra-low emission vehicles should also include enabling the use of cargo bikes for freight as an alternative to small vans.
In Net Zero Action 3 – Encouraging Alternatives to Driving, add plan for micro-mobility e.g. eScooters, to anticipate future trends.
In Sustainable Growth Action 1 – Improving Access to Opportunities. “Creating a high-quality walking and cycling network connecting neighbourhoods and shopping areas” should be “Creating and maintaining a high-quality walking and cycling network connecting neighbourhoods and shopping areas”.
In Inclusive, connected and efficient Action 1 – Designing For All, add “Well maintained pavements and cycle lanes clear of obstructions such as EV charge points and pavement parking”
In Inclusive, connected and efficient Action 2 – Improving local connections add
Reducing severance e.g. by improving pedestrian and cycle crossings over the Urban Motorway and the A1 Western bypass.
In Inclusive, connected and efficient Action 2 – Improving local connections “Implementing traffic reduction schemes in neighbourhoods” should include the use of low traffic neighbourhoods to prevent non-local traffic using neighbourhood streets as a short cut to avoid queues on the main road network.

Crossing the Great North Road, north Gosforth

4. If you have any final comments or suggestions about the proposed Movement Strategy, please tell us about them here:

The strategy needs to prioritise urgent action now rather than blue-sky policy making with no real-world impact. The city is long-overdue to meet legal air quality targets and only has five years left before the 2030 Net Zero target.
A strategy needs leadership willing to implement the strategy, not give up at the first sign of disagreement. There’s no political choice that has unanimous backing, and that is as true for transport as every other domain.
The strategy should include a plan for engaging with residents. This should include rapidly challenging false narratives and incorrect information e.g. false claims such as LTNs causing additional traffic on main roads or reducing emergency vehicle response times.
If the plan is to replace existing policy, e.g. in the DAP or Reframing transport, it should ensure it is more ambitious and include any actions from the DAP and other policy documents that are still relevant.
Road safety should be non-negotiable, and not tradeable for other benefits (Vision Zero).
Actions that support all principles should be given the highest priority, for example a safe accessible, all age and ability cycle network would improve safety, improve health, cut emissions and pollution. Likewise, actions that have a negative impact on multiple objectives e.g. increasing road capacity for vehicles, should not be pursued.
The strategy needs to include firm metrics for how progress will be measured with time-bound targets.

Please complete the Council’s online questionnaire online questionnaire by 29 November 2024.

If you think we have missed any important points please let us know via the comments below.

What do you think our transport networks should look like in 20 years? We need your views and ideas to help us develop a Movement Strategy that will shape transport development across the city. You can find out more and take part in our consultation now at https://t.co/daGzf9j92r pic.twitter.com/OZOfMejZa6
— Newcastle City Council (@NewcastleCC) October 14, 2024

The post Movement Strategy – Respond by 29 November 2024 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Gosforth High Street Bus Lane Decision

SPACE for Gosforth — Sun, 15 Sep 2024 20:46:37 +0000

Newcastle City Council has confirmed the outcome of its Gosforth High Street bus lane trial.

In a Twitter/X post featuring a long out-of-date picture of Gosforth High Street, the Council announced the decision, saying that they are “investing in your commute” by making the bus lane on Gosforth High Street permanent.

In doing so, the Council have acknowledged that the intention of the trial was never to support High Street businesses, nor to enable people to travel safely to the shops.

https://twitter.com/NewcastleCC/status/1831694501494059415

In the associated news story, they claim that “data has shown that the bus lane has had a minimal impact on other journeys”. The only data about “other journeys” shared in the story to justify this statement relates to journeys through the High Street by car.

No consideration appears to have been given to people travelling to the shops, nor to the impact on people walking or cycling to, along or across the High Street.

Safety Considerations

The Council’s delegated decision report does acknowledge there has been what the Council phrases “a slight rise in injury collisions”.

They say “There have been 8 collisions involving personal injury on High Street since the introduction of the ETRO, 18 months ago. As a comparison, in the 5 years before the ETRO there were 20 recorded injury accidents.”

Data from the NE Road User Casualties Dashboard shows there have been ten injuries due to road traffic collisions since April 2023 when the bus lane was installed, all on different dates and all between Elmfield Road and Salters Road. This suggests the Council may have missed two collisions from their analysis, possibly more as the data will not yet be up to date for the full 18 months the ETRO was due to run.

Of the Council’s “20 recorded injury accidents” in the 5 years before the ETRO, 4 were south of Elmfield Road leaving sixteen between Elmfield Road and Salters Road, an average of 3.2 per annum, compared to 9 in the first year of the ETRO. Hardly a “slight rise”.

The Council go on to say “When looking into the collision reports in some more detail, the presence of the bus lane infrastructure is not attributed as a contributory factor in any of those accidents over the past 18 months.” We have submitted a FOI request to the Council to ask for these collision reports, but our assumption is that these are Police incident reports. It is extremely concerning if Council officers are relying on Police reports to assess the safety of a road layout rather than using their own professional judgement and highway design best practice and standards.

In our FOI we have also requested the Council’s analysis (if it exists) of whether the bus lane trial meets the objective set out in the original ETRO to “avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road [Gosforth High Street] and for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising”. This is a much higher, and more appropriate, standard than simply ‘not attributed to’.

Gosforth High Street bus lane to stay as council denies it caused rise in injurieshttps://t.co/aMMIUcts83 pic.twitter.com/W3yQBGv0Lj
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) September 4, 2024

Conclusion and Next Steps

SPACE for Gosforth believes the Council has prioritised speed over safety, and has failed to properly consider the impact of the scheme on most users and uses of Gosforth High Street.

Council decision making right now feels incoherent – for example compare the Gosforth High Street decision to Heaton LTN where safety was given as a reason for removing the scheme without any injuries being recorded, and to Jesmond where driving from the front to the back of someone’s house was given as a key reason for removing the LTN.

Our suspicion is that the Council was under pressure to claim Gosforth High Street was a success whatever the evidence, after having failed in their attempt to improve road safety in Jesmond, Fenham and Heaton, having given up on Blackett Street and ending the School Streets programme with only four School Streets implemented. If they had not decided to retain the bus lane it would have been the fourth ETRO in a row to be removed.

We have written to Councillor Kilgour (Acting Council leader) and Councillor William (Cabinet lead for transport) to seek answers. You can see our letter below.

One possible silver lining is that the Council have recognised that “A common theme of the feedback from the people taking part in the consultation centred around a perceived lack of active travel as part of the scheme.” and that they “are working on a separate phase [originally promised March 2023] to provide safer routes for more vulnerable road users that will not only encourage the use of the High Street as a destination but also provide improved connections to schools and other local amenities.”

They have also said in answer to a question at September’s City Council “The Council is committed to ensuring the success of district centres and as we have set out, we are committed to improving road safety, creating better public transport links and encouraging active travel around the Gosforth High Street area.”

Our expectations for this further phase is low though, certainly as far as cycling is concerned. This is partly due to the perception that the Council do not currently view road safety as a priority but also because the bus lane between Elmfield Road and Salters Road will prevent direct cycling access to the shops (because Gosforth High Street is multiple destinations not just one) and will act as a barrier preventing the implementation of safe crossings to connect residents with schools and other local amenities on the other side of the High Street to where they live.

We also believe it will do little for High Street businesses. Being able to cycle safely with children, and move safely between shops on Gosforth HIgh Street by bike, will (and has been proven to) help local businesses. Saving 90 seconds on a bus journey after most of the shops have shut will not.

SPACE for Gosforth’s letter to Newcastle City Council

Dear Councillor Kilgour and Councillor Williams,

Re: Gosforth High Street road safety concerns

We are writing to express our concern about the Council’s recent decision to make the Gosforth High Street ETRO permanent despite serious concerns about the safety of the road layout.

On 28 April 2024, we wrote to Councillor Kemp and Councillor Williams to ask them to expedite the removal of the failed Gosforth High Street bus lane trial due to the dramatic increase in injuries on the central section of Gosforth High Street in the year following implementation of the ETRO.

Since then:

Neither they, nor the service our letter was forwarded to, have responded to our letter.
No changes have been made to address safety concerns.
Councillor Woodwark had to table a formal question at June’s City Council before the Council would even acknowledge the existence of safety concerns on Gosforth High Street.
In Councillor Kemp’s response to that question, despite it being six weeks after we sent our letter, he said he was still “’not sure whether there is an upward trend in accidents”.
A further injury occurred on 17 May 2024 to a 21-25 year-old motorcyclist by the junction with Hawthorn Road.
The Council has published its report saying “there have been 8 collisions involving personal injury on High Street since the introduction of the ETRO” whereas the NE England Road User Casualty Dashboard clearly shows ten separate injuries all on different dates (see diagram below), casting doubt on the Council’s analysis.
Despite all the above, the Council has made a decision that the ETRO design will be retained, despite officers advising that the design does not meet the Council-adopted road safety standard LTN1/20.
The Council has not published collision reports nor any explanation of why it believes the trial layout was not in any way responsible for the increase in injuries, instead advising us (via social media) that if we have doubts about the Council’s analysis (which it hasn’t published) we should submit a FOI. This we have done.

We had hoped that, as a minimum, when the Council published its delegated decision report it would include an assessment of the injuries recorded and whether the ETRO had achieved the aim set out in the Statement of Reasons to “avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road [Gosforth High Street] and for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising.”

This is the right standard to use. This is why streetlights are installed to make it safe to walk in the dark, and why the PCC has committed to safer public transport.

Instead, the delegated decision document claims that the collision reports (which the Council has not published) say “bus lane infrastructure is not attributed as a contributory factor”, a much lower standard than ‘preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising’.

Even this is contradicted by Councillor Kemp’s response to Councillor Woodwark’s question, in which he said “Two of the bus accidents involved vehicles changing lanes at West Avenue.” which would not have been possible prior to the ETRO being implemented as there was only one north-bound lane.

Release the Safety Analysis

The Council (via social media) confirmed on that it had “closely analysed accident data”. As a first step the Council should publish this analysis as soon as possible to reassure the community that the Council still takes the safety of residents seriously.

We believe the Council has a number of further questions to answer regarding the Gosforth High Street trial and the decision to retain the bus lane between Elmfield Road and Salters Road.

Did you seek or receive any advice from officers relating to road safety on Gosforth High Street following our letter of 28 April 2024?
Did you authorise Council officers to lower the safety standard against which the Gosforth High Street would be assessed (from preventing danger to simply avoiding blame)?
Was the Council’s failure to implement improved road safety in Jesmond, Heaton and Fenham a factor in the decision making for Gosforth High Street? We are concerned the bus lane may have been approved to avoid another Council PR disaster.
How do you explain the inconsistency between the decision to retain the dangerous ETRO layout as the starting point for further measures and Council decisions at Jesmond, Heaton and Fenham to remove LTN measures and start again from scratch, despite minimal evidence of danger?
Why have proposals “to make it safer, easier, and better for people to get around on foot and on bike” still not been published despite a commitment on 20 March 2023 “to share in the coming months”?
Why did Cabinet Members sign off a design not compliant with the LTN1/20 cycle design standard having previously supported the unanimously agreed November 2022 City Council motion requesting proposals for Gosforth High Street “are designed to the highest possible safety standards for both pedestrians and all road users, including LTN1/20”?
Is the commitment (para 9.6 of the delegated decision report) to “address any road safety issues in the next phase of proposals” a genuine commitment or simply a device to deflect from the Council’s failure to address safety concerns during the ETRO?
Will the Council commit to a safe future design that will allow all ages and abilities to cycle safely to and between the shops on Gosforth High Street, and which meets the LTN1/20 standard that Council Cabinet confirmed under your leadership “would apply to all schemes brought forward by the City Council”?
Will the Council commit to adopting the Road Collision Reporting Guidelines and stop using the term “accident” which (to quote the guidelines) “risks making crashes seem inevitable and unavoidable”?
Given the decisions at Jesmond, Fenham and Heaton, the recent closure of the school streets programme, and long overdue lack of action to improve safety at Linden Road and Hyde Terrace in Gosforth, how does the Council leadership expect residents to believe both that the Council still considers their safety when travelling to be a priority and has the means and will to do something about it?

We look forward to receiving your answers to these questions.

We have also published this email on our website [link provided].

Copies sent to

Gosforth Ward Councillors and
Councillor Ferguson and Councillor Penny-Evans as Chair and Vice Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Coordination Committee.

Kind Regards,

SPACE for Gosforth

Timeline and References

November 2019 Delegated Decision to reduce the speed limit on the central section of Gosforth High Street to 20mph (Item 17).
October 2022 Council Cabinet agree to adopt the LTN1/20 design standard (item 6) “to ensure [the Council] continue to deliver the best possible infrastructure”. The report also states “It is envisaged that these standards would apply to all schemes brought forward by the City Council”.
November 2022 City Councillors (including Cabinet Members) unanimously support a City Council Motion for Gosforth High Street to be “designed the highest possible safety standards for both pedestrians and all road users, including LTN1/20 which was recently adopted as the standard by Cabinet”. (item 76).
February 2023 Council announces bus lane plans. The associated design drawing title ‘General Arrangement Option B’ includes the printed text “This option would not comply with LTN1/20 as currently proposed”.
February 2023 SPACE for Gosforth’s briefing on safety concerns submitted to the Council (which the Council did not respond to). Published September 2023.
March 2023 Council announces the ETRO (not compliant with LTN1/20) will go ahead and commit to share proposals for walking and cycling “in the coming months”.
October 2023 SPACE for Gosforth suggestions for simple changes, some to improve safety (which the Council did not respond to).
February 2024 SPACE for Gosforth and other residents at the Gosforth Ward meeting raise concerns about increased rate of injuries being reported via the NE Road User Casualties Dashboard.
April 2024 SPACE for Gosforth’s open letter about safety concerns (which the Council did not respond to).
April 2024 ChronicleLive article highlighting increase in injuries.
May 2024 SPACE for Gosforth’s summary of CommonPlace feedback. (No similar Council analysis has been published.)
June 2024 Questions on Gosforth High Street safety concerns at City Council. (SPACE for Gosforth transcript)
September 2024 Written question on the future of Gosforth High Street by Councillor Woodwark at City Council.
September 2024 Delegated Decision Report.
September 2024 Council news story announcing retention of ETRO.
September 2024 ChronicleLive article announcing the Council’s decision.

The post Gosforth High Street Bus Lane Decision appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Air Quality Update 2023

SPACE for Gosforth — Wed, 24 Jul 2024 07:05:47 +0000

Official figures show that air pollution has reduced right across Newcastle in the first year of the city centre Clean Air Zone (CAZ). On average air pollution readings are 16% lower compared to 2021 and 2022, with only a few remaining locations over legal limits. Not only that, air quality has improved both within the CAZ and right across the city. Concerns that pollution would increase outside the CAZ have proved to be unfounded.

Overall this, and similar outcomes at other cities around the UK, are a great advert for Councils that are willing to listen to the evidence, make the case and take bold decisions to protect their residents from dangerous air pollution and other harms.

All but one of the air pollution sensors across Newcastle showed a drop in nitrogen dioxide levels from 2022 to 2023, the first year in which the Clean Air Zone tolls came into force https://t.co/RIvid2uNL9
— The Journal (@TheJournalNews) July 10, 2024

2023 Highlights:

The Clean Air Zone (CAZ) came into force at the end of January 2023, with non-compliant taxis, private hire vehicles, buses, coaches and HGVs being charged from 30 January 2023, and vans and light goods vehicles charged from July 2023.
In 2023, following the introduction of the CAZ, only five locations recorded readings higher than the legal maximum, and only two (Percy Street and on The Coast Road) were greater than 10% over the limit for Nitrogen Dioxide pollution. By contrast, in 2019, forty eight different monitors recorded air pollution over the legal limit.
Percy Street (45.9μg/m³), St Mary’s Place (42.2μg/m³), Blackett Street (40.9μg/m³) and Market Street (42.2μg/m³) were the only city centre locations over the legal limit.
The worst pollution recorded across all Newcastle was 67μg/m³ (down from 92.2 μg/m³ in 2022). This was on The Coast Road by the junction with Jesmond Park West, the same location as 2021 and 2022. No other locations outside the city centre were over the legal limit.
Pollution reduced right across the Newcastle upon Tyne local authority area suggesting fears of increased pollution in areas surrounding the CAZ were unfounded.
Measurements from Gosforth were all within UK legal limits for the fourth year running, with reductions of approximately 15% at all five monitored locations covering Blue House, Haddricks Mill roundabout and Gosforth High Street.

Note that roads works on the Tyne Bridge will not have impacted these figures as they started in January 2024 and the pollution data is for 2023.

Newcastle City Centre

Visitors, workers and residents in Newcastle city centre can now breathe a bit more easily, while predictions that the CAZ would turn the city into a ‘ghost town’ have been proved to be nonsense.

In the city centre, Percy Street by Haymarket was the most polluted location with a Nitrogen Dioxide (NO₂) reading of 45.9μg/m³, a decrease of 12% compared to 2022, one of four city centre locations still above the 40μg/m³ legal maximum for the UK.

The two maps below show air pollution measurements in the city centre and the percentage change compared to an average of 2021 and 2022 readings.

City Centre Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) NO2 readings

City Centre Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) Change in NO2 readings

Four locations in the city centre exceeded legal limits in 2023

45.9 μg/m³(down from 53.3 μg/m³ in 2022) DT29/DT30/DT31 (triplicate co-location site, Percy Street)
42.2 μg/m³(down from 44.7 μg/m³ in 2022) DT8 (Market Street)
40.9 μg/m³(down from 46.6 μg/m³ in 2022) DT65 (Blackett Street/Old Eldon Square)
40.5 μg/m³(down from 46.3μg/m³ in 2022) St Marys Place/John Dobson Street (DT5, DT115,DT116)

Air pollution levels on Mosley Street, Stephenson Road, Strawberry Place, John Dobson Street, Neville Street/Westgate Road were all within legal limits in 2023.

The biggest drop in air pollution anywhere in the city was -36% on Pilgrim Street, most likely due to traffic restrictions for nearby building works.

In 2019 (pre-Covid), Blackett Street was the most polluted location in the city centre with a measurement of 71μg/m³.

Air pollution on Blackett Street in 2023, including from buses, was just above the legal limit, measured at 40.9μg/m3.

PM2.5, very small particulate matter pollution, is also measured in the city centre at the Civic Centre. In 2023 the reading was 6.3μg/m³(broadly unchanged from 6.5μg/m³in 2022) which is less than the UK Legal limit 20μg/m³, but higher than WHO guidance that the annual average should be no more than 5μg/m³, which Newcastle City Council has committed to achieve by 2030.

The Government estimates that most PM emissions from road transport are non-exhaust emissions (brake, tyre and road wear), contributing 15% of total PM2.5 emissions. 29% of total PM2.5 emissions is estimated to come from wood-burning stoves and other ‘domestic combustion’.

Air pollution appears to have fallen across much of a city in the first year of its Clean Air Zone (CAZ) tolls, according to council data. https://t.co/VX1KKdCat9
— BBC North East (@BBCNEandCumbria) July 10, 2024

Central Motorway and Coast Road

The Council’s pollution plan analysis from 2019 was that air quality on The Coast Road would be compliant by 2021 and that no additional measures would be required.

In 2023, following introduction of the CAZ, substantial reductions in air pollution were recorded on The Coast Road, up to 29% in two locations. Despite that the reading by Jesmond Park West remains stubbornly high.

City Centre AQMA and Coast Road NO2 in 2023

Pollution reduced at all monitors along the A1058, including on Jesmond Road on the boundary of the now removed Jesmond LTN, which was in place from April 2023 to January 2024.

City Centre AQMA and Coast Road Change in NO2 readings

There was only one Coast Road location where air pollution exceeded the legal limit in 2023

67.1μg/m³ (down from 92.2 μg/m³ in 2022) DT81 (Stephenson Road, entrance to Jesmond Park West)

Traffic levels also reduced here from 50,111 average vehicles daily in 2022 to 48,067 in 2023. This may explain the greater reduction on the Coast Road compared to other parts of the city. This reduction in traffic may be related to the Jesmond Low Traffic Neighbourhood – we will be watching in 2024 to see if traffic will increase again following its removal.

Gosforth

In 2023, all Gosforth monitors recorded pollution levels within legal limits. Pollution on Gosforth High Street, which has been within legal limits since it became one lane in each direction, was the least polluted we’ve seen other than in 2020.

Gosforth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)

Gosforth will have benefited from the CAZ as approximately 6% of traffic on Gosforth High Street are buses and HGVs, and a further 6% are heavy vans, many of which will have been making journeys into or through the city centre CAZ.

Gosforth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)

Gosforth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) Change in NO2 readings

The four pollution measurements shown in Gosforth (all within UK legal limits) are:

35.5μg/m³, DT50 (84 Station Road)
33.8μg/m³, DT43 (53 High Street, Gosforth)
27.3μg/m³, DT44 (102 – 104 High Street, Gosforth)
36.4μg/m³, DT45 (201 Gosforth High St)

The graph below, updated for 2023, shows that air pollution at the three High Street monitoring sites and average daily traffic measured just north of The Grove are clearly linked. Because of this, doing anything that increases vehicle capacity on Gosforth High Street, including returning to the pre-Covid layout, would potentially be in violation of the Air Quality Regulations.

Air pollution and average daily traffic on Gosforth High Street

Denton Burn

All the readings west of the city were also within legal limits. Air pollution at Cowgate roundabout, which was over the limit in 2022, reduced by 34%. This and other measurements west of the city suggest fears that traffic would be rerouted away from the city centre were unfounded.

Denton Burn air pollution readings

Only one monitor increased from 2022 to 2023 and that was only a very slight change. This was at the A1 south of the A69 junction where the 2023 reading was 26.5μg/m³, up from 25.9μg/m³ in 2022 but still less than 2021 when the reading was 26.8μg/m³.

The lack of a decrease at this location may be due to additional traffic caused by induced demand from the A1 Scotswood to North Brunton road widening, which was completed 10 October 2022.

Denton Burn change in air pollution readings

The Clean Air Zone

When SPACE for Gosforth published its review of the Council’s final CAZ plans in 2019 we said Newcastle’s final air pollution plan has been watered down with no measures planned until 2021. Our assessment was calibrated against the 2016 UK High Court ruling that required the Secretary of State to “achieve compliance by the soonest date possible, that she must choose a route to that objective which reduces exposure as quickly as possible, and that she must take steps which mean meeting the value limits is not just possible, but likely.“

We stand by our assessment that limits could have been met sooner, and we are still waiting for the Council to set out how they will achieve the legal limit by Jesmond Park West.

We also stand by our assessment that the CAZ alone, though necessary, would not have been sufficient to meet air quality limits by 2020/2021. Other factors have also played a part in meeting air quality limits in 2023, including:

Fewer petrol and diesel vehicles as they are replaced by EVs.
The impact of the Covid pandemic on travel patterns.
Removal of free driving incentives like Alive After 5.
The reduction in traffic on Gosforth High Street since it was changed to be single-lane in each direction.

While the first of these is unlikely to be reversed, the other factors could be. The Council needs to ensure that it takes steps to prevent air pollution increasing again.

That said, eighteen years after UK Air Quality Limits should have been met in Newcastle, most of the city is now within air quality legal limits.

We do not believe this would have been possible without the CAZ. This Government’s Air Quality Technical Guidance states that charging the most polluting vehicles is one of the most effective ways to reduce pollution, and this seems to have been borne out.

As we said above, this, and similar outcomes at other cities around the UK like Bath, Birmingham, Oxford and Sheffield are a great advert for Councils that are willing to listen to the evidence, make the case and take bold decisions to protect their residents from dangerous air pollution and other harms. We hope the Council will continue to prioritise reducing air pollution to meet the lower more recently updated World Health Organisation limits.

We would like to thank the Council for releasing air pollution monitoring data several month’s earlier than in previous years, allowing us to better understand the impact of the CAZ and enabling the Council to plan any further measures necessary to address pollution at the five locations still over the limit.

This is SPACE for Gosforth’s eighth annual pollution blog covering official air quality monitoring in Newcastle upon Tyne. In all seven previous years, air pollution in Newcastle exceeded legal limits.

The main pollutant of concern in Newcastle is Nitrogen Dioxide (NO₂). The UK legal maximum for NO₂ is 40μg/m³ (micro grams per cubic metre) averaged over a calendar year, however the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommend that NO₂should be no more than 10μg/m³ averaged over a year.

For anyone thinking that there must be a better way to cut air pollution than a Clean Air Zone, the Council’s city centre Air Quality Plan, in place since 2008, includes 38 non-CAZ actions to improve air quality. None of these other actions have had anything like the same impact as the CAZ.

SPACE for Gosforth has previously summarised official air pollution measurements for 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2016.

The post Air Quality Update 2023 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

General Election 2024

SPACE for Gosforth — Sun, 23 Jun 2024 19:10:30 +0000

Gosforth is now part of the Newcastle upon Tyne North constituency

We have had a look at the political manifestos for the forthcoming general election on Thursday 4 July to see what they say about walking, cycling and other local transport issues.

At the last general election in 2019, there was remarkable political alignment from all parties about the need to prioritise and encourage walking and cycling. That is no longer the case.

Walking and cycling can though help with many of the big challenges facing the country that all parties are concerned about including cost of living, improving health, and the environment.

https://twitter.com/NorthEast_CA/status/1803790222183854163

We have included links to Living Streets, Cycling UK and other transport organisations who have commented on party manifestos at the end of the blog.

TRANSPORT QUIZ: Which party leader:

Was recently fined for speeding?
Received a fixed penalty notice for not wearing a seatbelt?
Was criticised for parking their chauffeur-driven car in a disabled parking bay?
Knocked a cyclist off their bike, but wasn’t prosecuted by the police?

See below for answers.

MANIFESTO HIGHLIGHTS

Labour – Catherine McKinnell

Labour Party Manifesto

Under the title “Kickstart economic growth”, the Labour Party promises a “modern transport network.”

They say “Cars remain by far the most popular form of transport. Labour will maintain and renew our road network, to ensure it serves drivers, cyclists and other road users, remains safe, and tackles congestion. We will fix an additional one million potholes across England in each year of the next parliament.”

They will also restore the phase-out date of 2030 for new cars with internal combustion engines.

In 2019 Labour said they would “increase the funding available for cycling and walking”, proposing “a capital budget of £4.7bn (£940m per annum) or £50 per person per head.” There is no similar spending commitment in the 2024 manifesto.

In Wales, the devolved Labour Government has introduced a 20mph default speed limit in built up areas. This has resulted in a 32% reduction in casualties and a 20% reduction in insurance claims. The Welsh Labour Government has also committed that “all future roads must pass strict criteria which means they must not increase carbon emissions, they must not increase the number of cars on the road, they must not lead to higher speeds and higher emissions, and they must not negatively impact the environment.”

Labour nationally has refused to commit to specific transport projects ahead of the election, but has in opposition commissioned an “independent review of rail and urban transport infrastructure”.

In a recent tweet, Louise Haigh (Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Transport) also said “Labour will support local authorities to provide the safe, accessible cycling infrastructure that is right for their areas – so that everyone who wants to cycle can.”

https://twitter.com/LouHaigh/status/1797599346630025336

Conservatives – Guy Renner-Thompson

Conservative Party Manifesto

Since Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister, the Conservative UK government has cut funding for active travel, withdrawn guidance for Councils to make streets safer, delayed the ban on new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 to 2035, argued against low traffic neighbourhoods that they previously promoted despite their own research report saying twice as many residents supported schemes as opposed it, and introduced a new “plan for drivers” partly based on conspiracy theories.

They have also failed to act on the pavement parking consultation that finished in November 2020.

In their manifesto, the Conservative Party proposes a number of policies that will make it harder for Local Authorities to implement road safety schemes like 20mph or Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, and have recently completed a consultation to limit Local Authorities’ ability to enforce traffic offences.

The Conservatives say they will “introduce a Backing Drivers Bill that will: Rule out top-down blanket Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and 20mph zones” saying “they must only be considered on a road-by-road basis and with the support of people who live there.” We will require any new schemes to be put to a referendum and introduce a ‘right to challenge’ existing Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and 20mph schemes.”

Subject to the above, they do say they “will work with Active Travel England to make it safer for people to walk or cycle, including projects like ensuring safe walking routes to schools and measures to protect pedestrians, cyclists and other vulnerable road users” and will “will extend the £2 bus fare cap in England for the entirety of the next Parliament”.

This is a very limited ambition given their Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Strategy confirms that “Active travel is good for the environment, our economy and public health.”

Guy Renner-Thompson, was also the Conservative candidate for NE Mayor. In that campaign he stated his intention to discourage “any developments that hinder car access” and to prioritise key road dualling and junction upgrades. He also said he wanted to scrap Newcastle’s Clean Air Zone, which has cut air pollution in Newcastle city centre.

Liberal Democrat – Aidan King

Liberal Democrat Manifesto

The Liberal Democrats say that “A safe, reliable transport system is vital for economic prosperity in all parts of the country. And improving transport is essential to combat climate change and air pollution.”

The Liberal Democrats say they will:

Transform how people travel by creating new cycling and walking networks with a new nationwide active travel strategy.
Give more of the roads budget to local councils to maintain existing roads, pavements and cycleways, including repairing potholes.
Pass a Clean Air Act, based on World Health Organization guidelines, enforced by a new Air Quality Agency.

The new manifesto doesn’t include their 2019 commitment to spend 10 per cent of the transport budget on walking and cycling.

Aidan King also recently stood as the Liberal Democrat candidate for NE Mayor as well as being a candidate in the Local Elections in South Jesmond ward. In his Council election leaflet he said that he was pleased the Labour Council removed the bollards stopping through traffic on Osborne Avenue and Grosvenor Road in Jesmond.

Ed Davey does a bicycle trick during his Welsh General Election campaign launch (2024) pic.twitter.com/7qQznvGF6s

— insane moments in british politics (@PoliticsMoments) May 29, 2024

Green – Sarah Peters

Green Party Manifesto

If elected, Greens say they will “push for”:

Investment of £2.5bn a year in new cycleways and footpaths.
Reimagining how we use streets in residential areas to reduce traffic and open them up for community use.
Adopting Active Travel England’s objective of 50% of trips in England’s towns and cities to be walked, wheeled or cycled by 2030.

Green MPs will also “press for: A new Clean Air (Human Rights) Act, giving everyone the right to breathe clean air.”

These commitments are similar to 2019 when the Green Party said they would spend “£2.5 billion a year on new cycleways and footpaths” 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.”

https://twitter.com/greenmattbfd/status/1797523808393572617

Reform UK – Deborah Lorraine

Reform UK Manifesto

Reform UK say they will “Legislate to ban ULEZ Clean Air Zones and Low Traffic Neighbourhoods.” 20 mph zones will only be allowed “where safety is critical”. They do not elaborate on where they believe safety is ‘critical’ vs where it is not.

Reform UK do not mention walking or cycling.

Social Democratic Party – Martin Evison

SDP Manifesto

The SDP Manifesto says:

They “will oppose new low-emission zones unless they have the clear public support of the local community. We will continue to build dedicated cycle lanes, but will not hive space off crowded roads to do so.”
“Funding for bus travel will be increased to enable fare reductions, increased frequency, increased security, new bus lanes, integration with other modes of transport and the protection of essential rural routes.”

Independent – King Teare

Facebook page

King Teare hasn’t shared any policies.

General Election 2024 – Gosforth is in the new Newcastle upon Tyne North constituency.

This is the link to register to vote: https://t.co/I4Nsrdz7m6 pic.twitter.com/1vCYdPp5PO

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) May 23, 2024

Gosforth High Street discussed at City Council

SPACE for Gosforth — Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:25:28 +0000

Councillor Kemp responds

At the 12 June 2024 City Council meeting, Councillor Woodwark (Lib Dems, Gosforth Ward) asked a question about injuries recorded on Gosforth High Street since the Council’s bus lane trial was installed.

Item 7: Oral question 2 to Councillor Williams from Councillor Woodwark

Accident data from the North East Road Users Casualty Dashboard indicates that in the last year, pedestrian accidents have increased nearly threefold on Gosforth High Street, compared to the average across the past decade, since the new bus lanes were introduced.

Given that the Council’s policy on transport and travel is clearly in flux, given U-turns on a range of schemes across the City, does the Cabinet member believe that the policy for Gosforth High Street should similarly be reviewed in light of the concerning trend of increasing pedestrian accidents?

City Council meetings are recorded on You Tube. You can see Councillor Kemp’s response from about 33 to 38 minutes, or in our transcript below, along with SPACE for Gosforth’s response to Councillor Kemp’s comments.

Response from Councillor Nick Kemp, leader of the Council

“We have had eight collisions on Gosforth High Street since the introduction of the bus lane. There was a pedestrian accident at the crossing adjacent to North Cross Street where the pedestrian was hit by a car. A person got their fingers caught when exiting a taxi. Two accidents involved cyclists turning into and out of the side streets. Four accidents involved buses and included passengers falling on the bus. Two of the bus accidents involved vehicles changing lanes at West Avenue. The speed limit on Gosforth High Street is 20mph. Officers are continuing to monitor data, including accident data, before deciding whether to make the scheme permanent and any decision will be informed by the data and feedback from the consultation process which is now closed.”

Councillor Woodwark’s Supplemental Question

“Given the the upward trend that the accident statistics on the High Street clearly show and given the implementation of the bus route is against what was unanimously agreed by this Council in 2019, would the leader of the Council say that there was any ability for a move towards looking at using a District Centre which is what Gosforth High Street is rather than a thoroughfare conscientious it is the cause of these accidents?”

Councillor Kemp’s response

“I’m not in a position to answer directly behalf of my cabinet colleagues but what I would say is I’m not clear that what you state or suggested as being empirically accurate. I’m not sure whether there is an upward trend in accidents if incidents such as an individual catching their fingers in a taxi door counts as an accident in this instance because I think we are correlating a number of issues together and I think it would be worthwhile looking a bit more in detail at the accidents, the causation of the accidents where there’s a relation to. The principle of district hearts I am entirely wedded to, but that’s not the same as saying a point around the bus lanes. I am committed and have been committed for a long long time about the rebirth, regeneration and repurpose of district hearts across the whole of our city.”

Councillor Ferguson’s (Lib Dem, Gosforth Ward) Supplemental Question

“Picking up on your final comments there Councillor Kemp, would you then agree with the Liberal Democrats that the High Street should be a destination, not a thoroughfare as it is currently configured?”

Councillor Kemp’s response

“I find it always quite difficult to agree with the Liberal Democrats to but honest Councillor Ferguson but hey I think actually it is slightly more semantic than you are suggesting because for many people the district heart is a district heart, and it is a destination for many people who visit to access the facilities and services that exist there rather than a thoroughfare. I think some of it is about perception. I would like to see Gosforth HIgh Street continue to thrive and grow and develop and provide increased local services for people both locally and further afield.”

SPACE for Gosforth’s response

These are the nine injuries recorded on the central section of Gosforth High Street between April 2023 and February 2024, recorded on the NE Road User Casualty dashboard.

In line with Media Reporting Guidelines for Road Collisions we don’t say “accidents‘ as road traffic injuries are caused by preventable factors such as poor driving and badly designed road layouts.

Councillor Kemp states that he is “not sure whether there is an upward trend in accidents”.

The bar chart below shows the number of people injured by year on Gosforth High Street. The nine injuries in the year following the installation of the bus lane in April 2023 is the highest recorded for at least a decade.

The 20 mph limit, implemented in May 2020, should mean there are fewer collisions, not more. After a default 20 mph limit was introduced in Wales, injuries dropped by a third.

There have been ten injuries since Newcastle Councillors, including the current Cabinet, voted unanimously for Gosforth High Street to be “designed to the highest possible safety standards for both pedestrians and all road users.”

Based on Councillor Kemp’s statement we now know seven of the collisions on Gosforth High Street collisions are linked to or were made more likely by the new road layout.

Two people cycling hit by a vehicle when turning into or out of a side street. Turning across two lanes of traffic is more dangerous than turning across one lane.
Two bus passengers injured due to vehicles changing lanes at West Avenue.
The other two bus passengers injured falling while on a bus, most likely due to rapid acceleration or deceleration.
A person hit by a car driver when crossing by North Cross Street – possibly due to traffic lights being obscured by a bus in the left hand lane as we highlighted in our safety briefing.

If any of the Council’s other recent traffic trials had led to nine people being injured they would have been removed immediately. Why is Gosforth High Street being treated differently?

The Heaton LTN was recently removed in part because Newcastle City Council considered that road safety risks there were a “major concern”, even without any actual injuries being recorded.

Councillors need to show some leadership, not shift the blame for poor decisions to Council Officers. Over ten people were injured every week on Newcastle’s roads in 2023, two of them seriously. Road danger isn’t a problem that will just go away with more “monitoring”.

Gosforth High Street needs a new design that meets the “highest possible safety standards for both pedestrians and all road users” that Councillors voted for, and residents supported in consultation feedback.

He said that complaints of a 'dramatic' jump in accidents included a person getting their fingers caught in a taxi doorhttps://t.co/2Znpg5HoiE
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) June 14, 2024

The post Gosforth High Street discussed at City Council appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

A1 dualling + 1.4m tonnes CO2e

SPACE for Gosforth — Wed, 29 May 2024 08:09:50 +0000

“Can’t wait for the road to be widened!” The effects of Induced Demand.

In what may have been his last act, Conservative transport minister Mark Harper has approved the Development Consent Order to dual the A1 between Morpeth and Ellingham. With an estimated cost of £290m in 2014 (£390m in 2024 prices) this could be one of the single most expensive transport projects in the North East.

We don’t yet know what will be included in political manifestos, so this may still not go ahead, but in the last few months both Government and opposition Labour shadow ministers have supported the scheme. In this blog we present evidence on emissions, road safety and the economy that suggests there would be far better uses for this money.

Our key concern is that, according to National Highways’ own estimate, A1 dualling will lead to an additional 1,437,282 tonnes CO2e at exactly the same time as we are all being told we should be rapidly reducing emissions.

They feel the carbon emissions produced as a result of the project would be "ruinous"https://t.co/QnYTmFWT8a
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) April 15, 2024

Most, if not all, of the evidence we present below applies to all major road expansion projects.

1. The UK cannot achieve legal carbon budgets if it continues to expand road capacity

We know that:

Action needs to be taken to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the UK as a whole the target reductions are set out in a series of legally-binding carbon budgets to achieve Net Zero by 2050. Northumberland County Council itself, has committed to “carbon neutrality for the county by 2030 and net-zero emissions for all greenhouse gases by 2040“.
Increasing road capacity will lead to increased carbon emissions. National Highways’ estimate, obtained via FOI, is that the A1 dualling project will lead to an additional 1,437,282 tonnes CO2e.
Multiple organisations have modelled whether traffic levels can increase or need to decrease in order to meet carbon budgets. We set out the results of this modelling in our blog How much less will we use our cars in future? This modelling suggests a >20% reduction in traffic levels will be required even with a rapid transition to EVs.
The UK High Court has recently ruled that the UK government’s climate strategy is not fit-for-purpose, and therefore breaches the UK Climate Change Act.

If the Government had a lawful climate strategy that robustly demonstrated that it was possible to dual the A1 and still meet carbon budgets then that would be different, but currently it does not. This strategy would have to show what other emissions will be reduced to offset the increase due to A1 dualling.

Instead the Government use what Transport Action Network describe as a ‘bonkers test‘, comparing the extra emissions from the scheme to the total UK emissions from all sources. Using the same logic we could all justify driving everywhere, burning coal on an open fire and flying long-haul six times a year on the grounds that each makes only a small percentage difference to total UK emissions.

The leader of Northumberland County Council, Councillor Sanderson has said there were “different” ways to address environmental concerns and that “the Northumberland Line project would help to take cars off the road by providing a reliable rail link between south east Northumberland and Newcastle.” If this is true then for transparency’s sake this plan and associated modelling should be released immediately.

Timing will also be an important part of the strategy. If built in 2035 or 2040 the impact would be less than if built in 2025, because a greater proportion of vehicles would be EVs. If a new Government restored the ban of new petrol and diesel cars to 2030, that would help also bring forward the date when this scheme could be built.

The other consideration would be what other road schemes will be built. Just dualling the A1 would be far less impact than a large programme of work expanding roads across the country, as is currently planned.

2. There are much better options to improve road safety

Perhaps the best reason given to support the A1 dualling project is to improve road safety. SPACE for Gosforth supports Vision Zero – the target of having zero deaths or serious injuries from road traffic collisions.

Between 2006 and 2024 there were 785 deaths or injuries recorded in total across all single carriageway sections of the A1 in Northumberland, from Morpeth to Berwick-upon-Tweed. These included 26 fatalities, 133 serious injuries and 626 slight injuries. In the same time period, across Northumberland as a whole, there were 3054 people killed or seriously injured on the roads.

However, we know schemes to increase road capacity have the potential to increase deaths, injury and poor health in a number of ways including:

From air pollution.
By contributing to climate change.
From physical inactivity because they encourage more driving and driving is a sedentary activity.
From increased road traffic collisions in surrounding areas due to higher volumes of traffic caused by the scheme, including on the remaining single carriageway between Ellingham and Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Due to the opportunity cost of not using the same budget on more cost-effective road safety measures.

It is also not clear from the injury statistics that dualling will reduce the number of people killed or injured. On the ~10 mile dualled section of the A1 between the A19 and A167, there have been about 9 fatalities and 53 serious injuries since 2006, a similar rate per mile as the single carriageway section. So even if individual journeys are made safer, the totals remain similar because of the much higher volume of traffic.

The paper Traffic volume and crashes and how crash and road characteristics affect their relationship – A meta-analysis explains this, setting out that “Crashes increase with increasing volumes [of traffic] but mostly at a lower rate. The relationship is strongest for multi vehicle crashes, at high volumes, and on freeways.” This means that additional traffic caused by this scheme is likely to lead to additional collisions, especially on surrounding roads that won’t have benefited from the safety improvements.

Looking at the NE England Road User Casualty Dashboard, it is easy to see the opportunity cost of focusing on one section of dual carriageway rather than a more comprehensive safety plan. The map below shows deaths (in red) and serious injuries (dark blue) from road traffic collisions in Northumberland between 2014 and 2024 (to date). This includes 141 fatalities and 1,550 serious injuries spread across both rural and urban areas.

Map of road user casualties in Northumberland from 2014 to 2024 (to date)

Councillor Sanderson, leader of Northumberland Council has said “the safety factor of dualling the road was the most important part”, but if there was a £390m budget to improve road safety there is no way, given the distribution of injuries shown above, that anyone would reasonably decide to spend the entire amount on just one thirteen-mile section of road.

For the same price as the A1 dualling project, more cost-effective measures could be introduced right across Northumberland’s rural roads, achieving a much greater safety benefit overall.

More cost-effective options for improving road safety include:

Introducing average speed cameras. When these were introduced on the A9 in Scotland, there was a reduction of about 40% in fatal and serious injuries.
Lower speed limits by junctions or where visibility is limited.
Reducing speed limits on minor rural roads that are not part of the main road network.
Traffic-free walking and cycling routes and safer pedestrian and cycling crossings.
Specific junction improvements.

The group raised questions about road safety and net-zero planshttps://t.co/JcpJgGCUg1
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) April 27, 2024

We should also remember that carbon emissions from the scheme will contribute to climate change and extreme weather events. Scientists have sought to understand the likely impact of additional carbon emissions on death rates due to climate change through the calculation of a “mortality cost of carbon (MCC)”, which estimates the number of deaths caused by the emission of one additional metric ton of CO2. According to Nature, “adding 4,434 metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2020—equivalent to the lifetime emissions of 3.5 average Americans—causes one excess death globally in expectation between 2020-2100.” Dividing 1,437,282 tonnes by 4,434 suggests the climate impact of the A1 dualling project will be in the region of 324 additional deaths.

3. Economics

The economic case for new roads is generally based on the idea that if capacity is increased people will be able to travel more quickly. However, this does not always work out in practice, and other costs also need to be taken into account.

Specifically

Additional traffic induced by the increased road capacity means journey times don’t reduce as planned.
Road works while schemes are built cause delays.
Economic damage from climate change.
Like with road safety, there is an opportunity cost from not investing in other projects that would yield a greater economic benefit.

In the example below relating to the M25, journey times improved in the first year after a new lane was installed but then returned to what they were prior to the extra lane being installed. The article doesn’t say whether one year of improved journey times was sufficient to offset multiple years of delays due to roadworks.

A study showed that M25 widening did not result in less congestion, but rather more people used it and quickly gobbled up extra capacity. The economic model to justify the investment relied on the promise of higher traffic speeds.

I promise you, one more lane won’t fix it. pic.twitter.com/5bTLlxCEpt
— Adam Tranter (@adamtranter) December 31, 2022

In 2019, the BBC reported that Traffic was ‘worse’ at Newport M4 junction in Wales after £13m upgrade.

In 2021 the Welsh Government announced new road building would be put on hold while a review was undertaken. In 2023, following that review, Wales cancelled its road building programme concluding that “approach of the last 70 years was not working” aiming instead to put the money into projects that “reduce carbon emissions and support a shift to public transport, walking and cycling, improve safety through small-scale change and help the Welsh government adapt to the effects of climate change”.

Wales is not alone in coming to this conclusion, as we set out in our blog How much less will we use our cars in future?

A recently released paper estimates the likely economic damage due to climate change to be about £840 per tonne CO2e emitted. Multiplying that by the 1.4m additional tonnes that will be emitted due to A1 dualling gives an expected economic impact of negative £1.2bn.

Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought – report https://t.co/xXviMMPhz8
— Guardian Environment (@guardianeco) May 17, 2024

By comparison, walking and cycling schemes have none of these disadvantages. In 2014 the Government reviewed the evidence relating to walking and cycling schemes and concluded “The typical benefit-cost ratios [for walking/cycling schemes] are considerably greater than the threshold of 4:1 which is considered by the Department for Transport as ‘very high’ value for money.” Investing the £390m budget that would be required for A1 dualling in walking and cycling schemes could lead to an economic benefit of >£1.6bn.

Conclusion

The A1 dualling business case now will be worse than ever as a result of inflation and the need to consider the impact of emissions which, as above, could amount to £1.2bn economic damage and 324 deaths just due to this one project.

Our view is that the budget should be reallocated (while there is still a budget) to cheaper, more effective changes that will lead to greater economic and safety benefits without the negative impact on climate and the environment. For example:

Average speed cameras to improve safety – with a 40% reduction in KSIs achieved on the A9 in Scotland.
Cleaner engines and more EV chargers to reduce emissions and air pollution.
Alternatives to driving to reduce the need to drive on the A1.
Tourist services to allow people to visit Northumberland without needing to own a car.
Service roads for farm vehicles so they don’t need to use the A1 itself.
Safe walking and cycling routes.

Of course, the future Government could choose to ignore the emissions and go ahead anyway.

Media Articles

An environmental campaign group has criticised long-awaited proposals to dual the A1 north of Morpeth. https://t.co/0aAkep2TFE
— Northumberland Gazette (@alnwickgazette) April 16, 2024

The group raised questions about road safety and net-zero planshttps://t.co/JcpJgGCUg1
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) April 27, 2024

A campaign has now been launched against the dualling of the A1 in Northumberlandhttps://t.co/0hEQT5OXWr
— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) February 23, 2022

The Journal: Go Green with us – and say no to A1 dualling #regionalfronts pic.twitter.com/wbXQTdMGTv
— Regional front pages (@regionalfronts) April 15, 2015

https://twitter.com/WATERSHED_i/status/1709892270781005918

The post A1 dualling + 1.4m tonnes CO2e appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Gosforth High Street Consultation Report

SPACE for Gosforth — Mon, 13 May 2024 18:44:28 +0000

The Council haven’t published a report on the Gosforth High Street ETRO consultation that finished in September 2023, so we thought we would have a look at what people said.

Overwhelmingly (66%) responses were negative or mostly negative and wanted the trial to be removed. This increased to 74% if ‘likes’ were also taken into account (similar to Jesmond).
The biggest reasons people gave for not wanting to make the trial permanent were the need for better cycling facilities, traffic congestion and the design prioritising through traffic over the High Street’s role as a destination.
The one main positive reason given was that it was good for buses.

We shouldn’t read too much into any percentages however, as the purpose of consultation is to identify rather than quantify issues. Residents already have a say over policy via local elections. If Councils want a view on what proportion of residents support or oppose a trial then they would have to poll residents, and they haven’t done that.

Unlike Jesmond however, which was shared across national media, we believe the vast majority of comments on the Gosforth High Street trial were from residents or other users of Gosforth High Street.

Overall sentiment

Overall 66% of 452 responses on the CommonPlace survey website were negative or mostly negative about the trial layout, while fewer than a quarter thought the trial layout should be made permanent.

This is based on individual responses and does not include ‘likes’ or other feedback the Council may have received e.g. via email. Including ‘likes’ takes the negative / mostly negative figure to 74%.

Opposition to the Gosforth High Street Trial Layout

Six main reasons were given for disliking the trial layout. These included a mix of concerns including the poor environment for pedestrians, lack of safe cycling facilities and congestion for motor traffic. Other concerns shared were that the layout made the road more dangerous and polluted and that it is not appropriate for a destination like Gosforth High Street.

20% in the above graph equates to roughly 90 responses in the consultation. When counting responses we have included all mentions of the concern regardless of whether the response was negative or positive overall, though the vast majority were negative or mostly negative.

The fact that people have raised these points as concerns doesn’t mean they are actually issues, but they should be assessed objectively by Council officers. Our assessment of each of these is included below, based on information already in the public domain.

Support of the Gosforth High Street Trial

Only one reason for liking the trial layout was mentioned in over 10% of responses – that the trial layout was better for buses.

As with comments opposing the trial, we have counted all positive mentions of buses regardless of whether the response overall was positive or negative.

What better cycling facilities did people ask for?

The need for better cycling facilities were asked for in 21% of responses. Many of these comments expressed a view that Gosforth High Street was dangerous for cycling. Some included specific requests, which ranged from general support, more cycle parking, protected lanes on Gosforth High Street and improvements in the surrounding areas.

“The measures are not safe for cyclists and there are way too many buses. Give cyclists a properly segregated cycle lane in both direction.”
“It’s so dangerous to ride down there with buses giving no space and crowding up behind you.”
“I don’t cycle to the high street and I wouldn’t want my kids doing so currently, sharing bus lanes with the largest vehicles on the road.”
“I often have to cycle along and across the high street with my children, as implemented these changes have made this feel much more dangerous than the temporary bollards that were there before. The changes fall well short of the LTN 1/20 guidance.”
“At the very least it needs to be safe for all users including families to walk or cycle to the shops… If you want shops at either end of the High Street to be viable you need to make it possible to cycle between them.”
“I am VI but also a cyclist. I feel this is no better to provide a safe and accessible cycle lane. It’s imperative that cycling is kept segregated from the road and pavement. I have had too many near incidents on the road.”
“These proposals make it clear that pedestrians and cyclists are an after thought and will only help cars and buses get through gosforth as quickly as possible. It will put off the local people like me who spend money at the high street.”
“What the High Street really needs are protected cycle lanes like Heaton Road has got (and look at what’s happened to that street – can barely move these days for tapas, sourdough and people having a nice time).”
“Segregated cycle lanes on the High Street would encourage those who would like to cycle but are too frightened, including parents and children on the school run, and help reduce private car use.”

A much smaller number (~4%) thought the trial had improved cycling “At least, the sharing of space with buses is better than having to share a single lane with all traffic.” Some of these comments mentioned positively the cycle lane defenders north of Salters Road, though these are not in the trial area.

SPACE for Gosforth’s Assessment: Based on the Government’s LTN1/20 Cycling Design Guidance, which Newcastle City Council has adopted, the new layout on Gosforth High Street doesn’t comply with standards and is only “suitable for few people and will exclude most potential users and/or have safety concerns“. The drawings for the plan confirm that Council leaders were aware the proposal didn’t comply with LTN1/20 when they approved it.

This is what’s missing from Gosforth High Street. https://t.co/g2NjLJQFWu

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) December 16, 2023

Traffic Congestion and Pollution

Increased traffic congestion was mentioned in 19% of responses, increased air pollution in 12%. 8% of responses mentioned both.

This comment sums up the sentiment “Traffic throughput has fallen significantly. There are now queues during the day, not just at rush hour, and air quality is worse. Changing from two northbound lanes to one at the Salters Road traffic lights (with the added bottleneck caused by buses merging in there)has caused congestion.”

People commenting made some suggestions for how to reduce congestion including reducing traffic levels (7% of all comments), rerouting buses (6%) and diverting people cycling along Moor Road South and Moor Road North (6%). A few people called for a toll e.g. “Introduce a toll system for non-local traffic and combine it with a park and ride system around Gosforth Park.“

Some suggested buses should stop at Regent Centre “The high Street needs to have less traffic, especially buses. Redevelop regent centre to provide the hub it was meant to be. More buses should stop there rather than going down the High Street.” This would be possible within the powers of the new NE Mayor.

A much smaller number (3%) said “traffic flow” either would or had improved.

SPACE for Gosforth’s Assessment: People often associate increased congestion with increased air pollution. Our tracking of air pollution on Gosforth High Street suggests air pollution is correlated with traffic volumes rather than traffic queues. Congestion discourages more people from driving so while emissions per vehicle are increased, overall pollution levels are lower because there are fewer vehicles.

As traffic counts in 2023 are similar to 2022, we expect air pollution will remain within legal limits either at a similar level to 2022 or lower if the city centre Clean Air Zone has had an effect. The last time air pollution exceeded legal limits on Gosforth High Street was 2019, when it had two vehicle lanes in each direction outside Gosforth Shopping Centre. This, along with the need to improve safety and design for a destination, is why SPACE for Gosforth opposes a return to the pre-Covid layout.

In 2022, air pollution measurements taken in Gosforth were within the legal limit for the third year running.

We also know from the Council’s news article that journey times did not increase when Gosforth High Street was reduced to one general traffic lane in each direction, so we don’t expect the new layout will have negatively impacted vehicle journey times.

Design prioritising through traffic over the High Street’s role as a destination.

17% of responses said the road layout should support Gosforth High Street as a destination rather than prioritising through-traffic.

“The scheme is focused on moving traffic especially buses through the High Street. The scheme should instead focus on improving the High Street to reinforce its primary function as a District Centre for the wider Gosforth hinterland.”
“This scheme isn’t suited to the way Gosforth High Street is used. It is a local shopping hub, which benefits from a lot of custom from pedestrians including a lot of people and students on their way to and from school.”
“The Council have been talking for years about how Gosforth High Street should be more of a destination but this seems solely focused on getting people through as quickly as possible.”
“The street is so busy with motor traffic it is an open sewer of dangerous vehicles and the pollution they create. Please create a new design that puts local people who walk and cycle to the high street first and that supports local businesses by creating a pleasant place where people want to spend time.”
“More emphasis needs to be on making GHS a destination for visitors by discouraging through traffic and improving the experience for shoppers on foot. At the moment walking along the shops is unpleasant because of motor vehicles, narrow pavements and frequent obstacles.”
“Gosforth High Street should be a destination not a through route. You should be encouraging pedestrians (either make it mostly pedestrianised with only bus routes going through) or at a minimum give more priority to pedestrians crossing – currently you can wait ages for the lights to change.”

A few comments suggested driving to Gosforth High Street had been made harder.

“The restructured traffic system is having a negative effect on Gosforth High Street shops as shoppers avoid the area due to the congestion on the High Street and the fact that it is now much more dangerous to drive there.”
“Most motorists would rather visit the metro centre or cramlington to avoid going to the high street. By bringing in these measures the high street will die.”
“You may as well block it completely to traffic. I wish all the businesses success in 2023, however NCC clearly don’t have any consideration for local businesses.”

The ‘no loading’ restrictions were also mentioned, mostly negatively. However, one business owner said the restriction was good in that it “removes unwanted delivery drivers from blocking sight of my expensive window displays”.

SPACE for Gosforth’s Assessment: In November 2022 Councillors unanimously supported a motion that the road layout should support the development of Gosforth High Street as a thriving local destination. It has not achieved that objective. SPACE for Gosforth has looked at this in its blog Gosforth High Street has been designed like a bypass rather than a shopping destination. In that blog we described how priorities for a shopping street / community hub would differ from what is currently being trialled.

Current Trial Design Priorities	Priorities for a Shopping Street / Community Hub
Designed for vehicle through-put Journey speed Passing through Functional Cycling only for confident adults Traffic distributor Long distance vehicle travel for journeys passing through Gosforth without stopping Pollution within legal limits	Designed to maximise customer experience Customer dwell-time Stopping & spending money at local shops Attractive, welcoming and accessible Cycling for all ages and abilities Community destination Local walking and cycling to and between shops and services Pollution as low as possible

Gosforth High Street has been designed like a bypass rather than a shopping destination.

If you want a better plan for Gosforth High Street, you need to respond to the Council’s consultation ASAP.https://t.co/OVODoUDBkV pic.twitter.com/vyy4oRzzYZ

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) September 10, 2023

More Dangerous

16% of responses cited safety concerns with some saying they believed Gosforth High Street was more dangerous as a result of the new trial layout.

“The road itself now feels dangerous – it’s a slalom course with lanes converging on more than one occasion which will lead to more accidents.”
“The number of incidents and ‘near misses’ the bus lane has caused when turning left into the street are countless
“The bus lane is not needed at all. It has already caused a collision near the old Barclays Bank.”
“The bus lanes are a danger to cyclists and cars and I feel it just doesn’t work.”
“Currently very scary to cycle in a shared lane with bus drivers trying to make the most of their new ‘fast lane’. Many of the drivers are deliberately intimidating.”
“I also believe the measures are over complicated and make the high street more dangerous for vulnerable users of the space cyclist and pedestrians.”
“I rode my motorbike along the High Street yesterday, heading North, and it was the scariest section of rode that I’ve ridden in 45 years of motorcycling.”
“You have made a perfectly good road into a dangerous, overly complex traffic flow. The road is stop, start with a ridiculous new chicane and intermittent bus lanes.”
“This has made the high street more dangerous, particular for children crossing.”

SPACE for Gosforth’s Assessment: Between April 2023, when the trial layout was installed, and the end of February 2024 there were nine traffic collisions on Gosforth High Street between Elmfield Road and Salters Road. The equivalent for the previous ten years was 3.4.

SPACE for Gosforth recently wrote to Council leadership about this Gosforth High Street rethink needed after dramatic jump in injuries. We also sent the Council a list of safety concerns prior to the trial being implemented, which we documented in our blog Gosforth High Street – Safety Concerns.

These concerns were also covered by Chronicle Live.

Campaigners want to see the route redesigned again after a spike in traffic collisionshttps://t.co/WFzQ7Htmpe

— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) April 26, 2024

Improvements for Pedestrians

11% of responses complained that the new layout either made Gosforth High Street worse for pedestrians, or at least did nothing to improve it.

“The current carriageway crossings are too wide to enable adequate crossing time for disabled people.”
“At the moment walking along the shops is unpleasant because of motor vehicles, narrow pavements and frequent obstacles. I would like to see wider pavements, pedestrian areas and fewer private cars.”
“You should be encouraging pedestrians (either make it mostly pedestrianised with only bus routes going through) or at a minimum give more priority to pedestrians crossing – currently you can wait ages for the lights to change.”
“Declutter the pavement and trial removing the black bollards which take up over half a metre of pavement space on each side. 5) Reduce pedestrian crossing wait times, and ensure that there is time for people to cross.”
“Pedestrianise side street-ends so people walking along the High Street have priority over turning vehicles in line with the new Highway Code.”
“It should be semi-pedestrianised, in the same way the bus lane next to monument used to be. This would provide a quiet, clean high street, more space for businesses to expand seating areas onto the footpaths, an opportunity for weekend markets, food markets, etc”
“The high street would be far more enjoyable if there was greater space for pedestrians. Gosforth has lots of great businesses, cafes, schools, yet pedestrian access is hindered in favour of using the route as a thoroughfare”

SPACE for Gosforth’s Assessment: On 20 March 2023, Newcastle City Council said they “will be developing ideas to share in the coming months to make it safer, easier, and better for people to get around on foot and on bike”. Over a year has passed and we still haven’t seen any proposals.

SPACE for Gosforth has shared a number of suggestions with the Council that could have been introduced as part of the trial, but none have been acted on. These suggestions are set out in our blog Gosforth High Street – Small Changes.

In August we had a team walk along Gosforth High Street to see if we could come up with some ideas for what could be tried out fairly cheaply as part of the current trial arrangements. This is what we came up with. Let us know if you have any other ideas!https://t.co/e4MMvbve8W

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) October 4, 2023

Other Comments

Other concerns that fewer than 10% of responses mentioned were

Concerns about high levels of traffic using side streets (6%).
The removal of residents’ parking at the south end of Gosforth High Street (3%).
The layout being confusing, especially the stop-start nature of the bus lanes (3%).

SPACE for Gosforth’s Assessment: We have been concerned with high levels of traffic in side streets for a very long time. Whether this trial has increased volumes or not, and regardless of the changes on Gosforth High Street, this is an issue that needs dealing with. See for example this blog from 2016 1000 Speeding Drivers – A typical day on Gosforth’s back streets.

Residents parking was removed when the bus lane was installed. If parking is ever to be re-installed at the south end of Gosforth High Street then it should be done in a way that keeps the pavement clear and enables people to cycle safely.

Previous consultations

Residents have been consulted multiple times on the future of Gosforth High Street.

When residents were consulted in 2013, over 70% said it was important to make cycling improvements in and around Gosforth High Street.

Following that consultation, in April 2014, a petition signed by more than 3,000 people was handed into Newcastle City Council calling for a reduction in traffic to one lane each way, protected 24 hour cycle lanes, as well as opposing the reduction in spaces at Salters Road car park.

In 2018, SPACE for Gosforth sent its Your Streets – Your Views survey to residents of East and West Gosforth and Parklands wards, including a question on Gosforth High Street. The greatest concerns then were too much traffic and poor air quality.

While air quality has improved compared to 2019 due to a reduction in traffic levels, much more could be done to make Gosforth High Street a safer, more welcoming environment.

Conclusion

The Council has a clear mandate from the unanimously supported November 2022 City Council motion on the future of Gosforth High Street. It is clear the current plan does not achieve the objectives set out in that motion.

Looking at the responses, we also see significant opposition from residents to the trial layout on Gosforth High Street. These objections include well-founded concerns about the danger the new layout poses to those who use the High Street, and its failure to support the High Street as an important local destination. Newcastle City Council must act now and remove the bus lane, reverting to the previous layout of one traffic lane in each direction while consulting on a future permanent layout that achieves the objectives Councillors voted for.

We are still waiting for a response from Cllr Kemp and Williams to our open letter. We hope they will act promptly rather than waiting for more people to be hurt.

The post Gosforth High Street Consultation Report appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Gosforth High Street rethink needed after ‘dramatic’ jump in injuries

SPACE for Gosforth — Sun, 28 Apr 2024 20:32:31 +0000

According to the North East Road User Casualties dashboard nine people have been injured on Gosforth High Street between April 2023, when the bus lane trial was introduced, and the end of February 2024. The average for the same period in the previous ten years, 2014 to 2023, was 3.4.

SPACE for Gosforth has been quoted in The Chronicle calling for a rethink and has sent an open letter to Councillor Kemp (Leader of Newcastle City Council) and Councillor Williams (Cabinet Member for a Clean, Connected City), which we have published below.

Councillor Kemp knew before the bus lane was installed that there were safety issues with the Council’s road layout, because SPACE for Gosforth sent him and other Cabinet Members a safety briefing in February 2023. We explained these issues in our blog Gosforth High Street – Safety Concerns.

Council Officers were also very clear that the design that was implemented would not meet LTN1/20 Cycling Design Standards, a standard which Newcastle City Council has formally adopted, and was explicitly mentioned in a Council motion about Gosforth High Street that Councillor Kemp and other Cabinet Members voted for.

Campaigners want to see the route redesigned again after a spike in traffic collisionshttps://t.co/WFzQ7Htmpe

— The Chronicle (@ChronicleLive) April 26, 2024

This is SPACE for Gosforth’s open letter. If you wish to write to Councillor Kemp, Councillor Williams or your own local Councillors about this you can find their contact details on the Council website.

Dear Councillor Kemp and Councillor Williams,

Re: New plea for another Gosforth High Street rethink after ‘dramatic’ jump in injuries
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/new-plea-another-gosforth-high-29062354

We are writing to ask you to expedite the removal of the failed Gosforth High Street bus lane trial.

Since the trial bus lane was installed, the number of people injured in traffic collisions has increased dramatically. From April ’23 to February ’24 there have been nine injuries on the central 20mph section of Gosforth High Street, including four bus passengers. The equivalent average from 2014 to 2023 was 3.4.

We note that other experimental schemes in Jesmond and Heaton have been removed for far less serious concerns. At Jesmond you demonstrated you could act quickly. Given this precedent, you should now act quickly to remove the trial bus lane on Gosforth High Street. Indeed, given your previous actions, it would be hypocritical for you to retain the bus lane any longer than necessary, especially as – unlike in Jesmond and Heaton – people have actually been injured in Gosforth.

If you need further evidence, it is clear the trial has not achieved any of the objectives unanimously agreed by City Council in November 2022.

It has not supported the development of Gosforth High Street as a thriving local destination.
It does not meet the Council’s adopted safety standards, in particular LTN1/20 which was called out specifically in the November 2022 City Council motion.
It has not enabled any additional low-carbon transport options. Cycling remains dangerous, there are no improvements for people walking, and no more buses than prior to the trial.
It has had minimal impact on traffic levels and is therefore unlikely to have reduced pollution or greenhouse gas emissions.
It has not enhanced green infrastructure on Gosforth High Street.
It was developed and implemented without the support of elected representatives and without any meaningful engagement with local residents.

Clearly the ETRO objective “to avoid danger to persons or other traffic using the road and for preventing the likelihood of any such danger arising” has also not been achieved. Based on the TADU injury data the bus lane has increased danger in the central 20mph section of Gosforth High Street.

Proposed Next Steps

To prevent further injury, the Council should confirm urgently that the bus lane will be removed and confirm its vision for the High Street as a destination and not a through-route as it is currently laid out.
The Council should install a temporary safe layout while residents are consulted on next steps. We believe that this needs to be one lane of traffic (maximum) in each direction (a) to achieve required levels of safety and prevent further injuries and (b) as air quality legal limits have only been achieved on Gosforth High Street with one general traffic lane in each direction. Newcastle City Council has also previously confirmed that there was “minimal impact on the travelling public with the traffic reduced to two lanes through the High Street.”
As set out in the Council motion, the Council should consult with residents on a new layout that meets safety standards and is consistent with the objectives agreed at City Council. This should include proposals promised in March 2023 (but never published) for improving access to and along Gosforth High Street for people walking or cycling. The latter, cycling, has the greatest potential to increase the customer base of Gosforth High Street without requiring extra land for more parking and without increasing pollution or greenhouse gas emissions.
Lastly, there needs to be an investigation into how this was allowed to happen. Why were (a) Officer advice that the trial layout did not meet design standards and (b) the City Council motion asking for Gosforth High Street to be “designed to the highest possible safety standards” both ignored?

Councillors have unanimously agreed the objectives. We know funding is available. This was confirmed by the Assistant Director for Transport at the recent Gosforth Ward meeting and your own Manifesto refers to £7.7m Active Travel funding for Newcastle. All that is needed is for you to make a decision. We urge you to do so quickly.

We have also published this email on our website www.spaceforgosforth.com

Yours faithfully,

SPACE for Gosforth

The post Gosforth High Street rethink needed after ‘dramatic’ jump in injuries appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Local Elections 2024

SPACE for Gosforth — Sun, 28 Apr 2024 19:15:52 +0000

Elections for Newcastle City Council are due to be held on 2 May 2024. This blog looks at what Labour have delivered in the last year and what they and other political parties are promising in their local election manifestos.

There will be no Council election in 2025, so the next election after this will be in 2026 when all Councillors will be up for re-election with new ward boundaries. There will be a consultation on the new boundaries between July and September this year.

While SPACE for Gosforth is focused on transport and the environment, manifestos can cover the full range of Council services including social care, schools, waste, planning and public health. We have included links below where we have them, so you can find what parties are proposing in these other areas.

Did Labour deliver in 2023?

The Labour Party have led Newcastle City Council since 2011, with current leader Nick Kemp taking over from Nick Forbes in 2022.

Last year the Labour Party committed to make “streets and neighbourhoods cleaner and greener”, support “safe, active travel by improving walking/wheeling and cycling routes” and publish “a new plan for walking and cycling”.

They also committed in March 2023 that the next phase of Gosforth High Street would look at improvements for walking and cycling, and that they would be “developing ideas to share in the coming months”.

New measures to improve public transport on Gosforth High Street gets underway from today, with the bollards removed on the main section of the high street. Public consultation on the changes runs until 21 September. Find out more at https://t.co/J7qaM9t60b pic.twitter.com/uqsTfbyHjF

— NewcastleCityCouncil (@NewcastleCC) March 20, 2023

We and local Councillors have asked what is happening on Gosforth High Street but are still none the wiser. Nor have we received a response to our concerns over the safety of the new layout and a near trebling of injuries recorded since the bus lane was installed. The new plan for walking and cycling is also still to be published.

Three schemes to make streets cleaner and greener and support walking and cycling at Fenham, Jesmond and Heaton have been removed. In all three cases further proposals have been promised, but none yet offered.

The roll out of new school streets has been been stopped, and applications for play streets are still “paused“.

On the other hand, they have confirmed that the Five Admirals trial in Gosforth and school streets at Hotspur and Grange First will be made permanent, and have started work on Northumberland Street and the Queen Victoria Road cycle lane. Although work is just starting now, the plan to install a permanent cycle lane on Queen Victoria Road was announced three years ago in 2021.

Following SPACE for Gosforth’s campaign, Newcastle City Council applied for and received new traffic enforcement powers to improve safety at the Christon Road / Gosforth High Street junction though this has not been implemented yet.

Dangerous driving putting school children at risk by using the wrong lane to exit Christon Road, Gosforth onto Great North Road. This is what has led @NewcastleCC to install wands on Christon Road. pic.twitter.com/1K6U4h67Q8

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) August 22, 2023

We are also still waiting on updates for what Newcastle City Council will do:

to the ongoing school street trials at Ravenswood and Chillingham Road Primary school.
with the £3m funding previously allocated for the West Road in April 2023 to address traffic safety issues.
with the output from the 2022 Youth Climate Summit, the outcomes of which included asks from the youth participants to “reduce car travel by building more cycle lanes” and creating a ‘Green Zone’ in the city centre widening “bike routes and lanes within this zone”.
to decarbonise transport in the city to meet the 2030 deadline, which they have recommitted to in their 2024 manifesto. According to the December 2023 Priority Climate Actions Update, plans for a citywide low carbon transport vision (T1), additional school streets initiatives (T7) and schemes to reduce dominance of cars in the city by reallocating road space (T9), are all ‘progressing well towards completion’, but we have seen little evidence to back up these claims.

Overall, it is hard to avoid the impression that Newcastle Labour is walking backward on their claimed ambition of cleaner, greener streets. It doesn’t help that the transport section of the Council website seems not to have been updated for months, though still not as bad as Newcastle Labour’s own website where the homepage just says ‘page not found’.

2024 Local Election Manifestos

Labour Party

The Labour Party, with 47 of 78 Councillors, currently runs Newcastle City Council.

Labour’s 2024 local election manifesto, which we obtained by email, says they want “a great city which is the best place to grow up” and will “protect the things you have told us are most important to you”. They don’t clarify what these things might be or if they include protecting children’s ability to travel safely in their local area.

Amongst their priorities for 2024/25 are “Progress with the delivery of £7.7million funded Active Travel Network upgrades” and “More motorbike and cycle cages for safe parking”.

They also say they will be “Continuing to act on the climate emergency to achieve our target of net zero ambitions by 2030.” We presume (hope!) this is a typo and they mean net zero emissions. Given 43% of the time available to meet this target has now passed, they will need to get a move on.

https://twitter.com/climateticktock/status/1778077322790260899

Liberal Democrats

The Liberal Democrats are the official opposition in Newcastle with 22 of 78 Councillors. In the last year they have supported the low traffic neighbourhood trials in Gosforth and Heaton, but opposed the one in Jesmond.

Newcastle Liberal Democrats have published their City Council Election May 2024 – Manifesto. The only “top ten” priority specifically relating to transport is fixing “run-down roads and broken pavements”.

Under the title “Leadership of Place” they say they “will get the City moving, so that everyone can get to where they need to… creating an accessible, green City for all, so everyone can travel how they want to travel.”

To improve the environment they say “the City needs to support more active and sustainable transport” and that they too will create a plan “setting out a clear route to the future of City transport.”

Their previous commitment to a workplace parking levy has been dropped from the manifesto.

The Liberal Democrats haven’t mentioned Gosforth High Street in this year’s manifesto, but this is what they said last year.

I said it because I believe it. The scheme that Labour have put in is not what I want, it does nothing to improve the High Street.

— Tom Woodwark (@tomwoodwark) May 6, 2023

Conservatives

The Conservatives currently have no Councillors in Newcastle, though they regularly come second to the Liberal Democrats in Gosforth Ward.

We’ve had no response to our email and there is no local manifesto on the Newcastle Conservative’s website. Their local leaflets highlight the Labour Council’s success in filling the potholes they have reported.

Meanwhile, the Conservative UK government has cut funding for active travel, withdrawn guidance for Councils to make streets safer, delayed the ban on new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 to 2035, argued against low traffic neighbourhoods that they previously promoted despite their own research report saying twice as many residents supported schemes as opposed it, and introduced a new “plan for drivers” partly based on conspiracy theories.

National polling suggests the Conservatives could be on course for their worst election result ever, with only 16% of people trusting them most “to manage and improve the transport system” and only 13% trusting them to “protect the environment”.

If you want to report a pothole yourself you can do that on the Council website.

.@NewcastleTories clearly think pavements are for parking giant advertising screens on. Is this even legal? Really hope no drivers are distracted by this and hit someone crossing the road. pic.twitter.com/a0ZrdDy4ft

— space for gosforth (@space4gosforth) March 16, 2024

Green Party

The Green Party currently has no Councillors in Newcastle.

Newcastle Green Party has updated its Greenprint for Newcastle for the 2024 elections. They say they will “prioritise improvements to public transport, improve air quality and fully commit to an active travel infrastructure which enables people to walk and cycle safely.”

Specific proposals include:

Reducing traffic “by shortening distances to access everyday necessities.”
Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) and School Streets to
encourage more parents and children to walk and cycle to and from school;
Reintroduction of trams, “a city centre electric shuttle service to support those with mobility issues” and a workplace parking levy.
Expanding car club provision and new park and ride facilities.
Sustainable logistics including cargo bikes
Safe cycle storage across the city and cycling routes, especially in student areas.

North East Party

The North East Party who are standing in Gosforth ward, currently has no Councillors in Newcastle.

Their transport priorities for Newcastle (link to Facebook) are:

The Party endorses Jamie Driscoll’s transport plans for public transport etc.
The Party is committed to the removal of the Central motorway, replacing it with a tree lined boulevard.
The building of a bridge to link Newcastle/Gateshead, as planned in the 1970s, by Byker.
A £2.5m High street improvement plan, to improve pedestrian access, bus access, regeneration of the Central Park. This would make Gosforth a must visit hub for shopping, recreation and entertainment.
The implementation of LTNs and Road safety measures – taking a holistic view, with full community consultation.

No other parties or independents have put candidates forward for election in the four Gosforth Council wards.

More information about the Local Election and candidates can be found on the Council website.

The post Local Elections 2024 appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.