Queuing traffic on Elmfield Road (picture taken pre-Covid)

The website CityMonitor recently published an article “How Google Maps is ruining your neighbourhood“. The article explains that, since they were introduced in 2009, Sat Nav apps have caused an increase of traffic on minor roads.

While the sales pitch of Sat Nav apps is that they enable drivers to avoid congestion, the actual outcome is that minor roads can now be just as congested as main roads.

In effect traffic has been displaced from main roads onto minor roads.

How might Sat Navs be affecting traffic in Gosforth?

Clearly there are quite a few minor roads in Gosforth that are busy with traffic, including Elmfield Road pictured above.

We’ve had a look at what routes Google Maps recommends for driving through Gosforth. As the CityMonitor article says, many of these routes use minor roads that are not designed for high volumes of traffic.

Not all roads are affected. Some, like Bath Terrace in the picture below, have traffic “filters” that prevent vehicle traffic using them as through routes.

Bath Terrace, Gosforth

Newcastle’s Main Road Network

Newcastle has a main road network, defined as part of its Local Plan. The map below shows the main roads for driving in the Gosforth area.

These are the roads that are intended for, and designed to cope with, large volumes of traffic.

Newcastle main road map. Primary distributor roads are marked in red, secondary distributor roads in orange.

There are three types of main road in Newcastle’s plan.

• Strategic Roads (in blue) are nationally significant roads used for the distribution of goods and services, and a network for the travelling public.  The nearest strategic roads to Gosforth are the A1(M) Western Bypass and the A19.
• Primary Distributor Roads (in red) are the preferred roads for motorised vehicles and generally connect to strategic roads.  The primary distributor roads in Gosforth are Grandstand Road, part of Jesmond Dene Road, Matthew Bank, Haddricks Mill Road and Killingworth Road.
• Secondary Distributor Roads (in orange) generally connect strategic and primary roads to smaller areas and [in theory] carry significantly lower volumes of traffic than either of those categories, and fewer HGV’s.  Gosforth High Street is a secondary distributor road, as are Salters Road, Church Road, Station Road, Broadway West, Wansbeck Road, Kenton Road, and Great North Road north of Gosforth High Street.

Other roads, shown in white, are considered to be minor roads for access to people’s homes and local destinations.

Displaced Traffic

We found nine example part-routes where Google Maps has recommended using minor roads that are not part of the main road network.

In some cases the minor roads were quicker, but not always. Where minor roads are quicker, this is likely to be temporary as Sat Navs direct more traffic to the route undoing any benefit.

Noticeably, both historic and new Low Traffic Neighbourhoods like Brunton Park, Melton Park, Gosforth Terraces and Garden Village do not have any routes through them because they have been designed to prevent through traffic.

It is also noticeable that in many cases it would be just as quick, if not quicker, to cycle rather than drive.

In each case we have highlighted which minor streets are being used.

Route 1: via Elmfield Road and The Grove.

Route 2: via Lindon Road, Hawthorn Road and The Grove.

Route 3: Via Regent Farm Road.

Route 4: via Church Road, Hyde Terrace and Christon Road.

Route 5: via Linden Road and Elmfield Road.

Route 6: via Moorfield, Moor Road South, Hawthorn Road and Linden Road.

Route 7: via Moorfield, Moor Road South and Moor Road North.

Route 8: Via Regent Road North and Regent Road.

Route 9: Via North Avenue, Elmfield Road, Westfield Drive and Fernville Road.

What can be done?

It is worth saying that it is completely legal currently for people to drive on these minor roads to avoid main road traffic. The effect of this though, is more noise, exhaust fumes, and more danger for people who live on these roads or using them to walk or cycle.

Higher levels of traffic at peak times of day, just when children will be travelling to or from school, act as a barrier to prevent families walking or cycling the school-run. DfT estimate one in four cars on the road at peak times are on the school run. For more families to commit to walking or cycling, traffic levels have to be consistently low at the times they want to travel, not just on a quiet Sunday morning.

From an engineering perspective, it is quite simple to stop traffic being displaced from main roads onto minor roads. All it needs is a few bollards and/or some planters to prevent through traffic, just like on Bath Terrace (see previous picture).

We know, not least from experience on Salters Bridge, Stoneyhurst Road and Castle Farm Road, that stopping through traffic on minor roads has practically no impact on adjacent main roads but it does improve quality of life for residents, reduce road traffic collisions, and enables more people to walk and cycle.

It is also a necessary pre-cursor to any traffic calming to make main roads safer.

If you think we have missed any routes please do let us know via the comments, and please do let your local Councillors know if you are concerned about traffic on minor roads.

If you want to read more, this is the City Monitor article.

Have you noticed your neighbourhood streets getting busier…?https://t.co/L16S6mr2Af

— City Monitor (@CityMonitorAI) July 12, 2022

The post Sat Navs are ruining Gosforth appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Six months ago, Newcastle City Council changed the road layout on five bridges so that they could only be used by people walking, in wheelchairs, or on bikes/scooters. The Council’s aim in doing so was to achieve safer residential streets by reducing motor vehicles speeding and to remove ‘through traffic’ from residential areas.

To close these bridges to motor vehicles the Council used an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO), with the first six months of the order being a public consultation period. This allowed the Council to implement the changes quickly as required by Government to ensure (in the Government’s words) “transport networks support recovery from the COVID-19 emergency and provide a lasting legacy of greener, safer transport”.

According to Commonplace, there have been approximately 10,000 comments made on the Council’s consultation website, which is a sizeable response and shows much greater public engagement than previous more traditional ‘in advance’ consultations.

This blog sets out SPACE for Gosforth’s response to the bridges’ consultation focused mainly on policy, evidence and best practice. In summary, there is strong evidential support for the changes and, in our view, no local evidence to suggest that benefits won’t be achieved.

Those benefits include:

• Generally creating more pleasant local places for people to live e.g. from less traffic noise
• Improving road safety, including for children on the school run
• Making it easier to walk and cycle, increasing people’s choices for how to travel
• Improving health from more walking and cycling
• Helping people on lower incomes because walking/cycling are cheaper than driving or the bus, including people travelling through the area & across Jesmond Dene to local employment sites.
• Reducing emissions to address the Climate Emergency with minimal cost or impact on lifestyles compared to e.g. road pricing, carbon taxes or forcing people to buy expensive new electric vehicles.
• Incredible value for money given how effective they are, how cheap they are to implement and the range of policy areas supported.

These support the Council’s longer term vision of a “safer, cleaner, greener Newcastle”.

Clearly many people still have concerns about the plans. We have looked at some of these in our previous blogs Enabling Safe Walking and Cycling via Local Bridges and Stoneyhurst Bridge – Review of Concerns.

There is good news that predictions of traffic chaos haven’t happened and traffic levels on surrounding roads remain lower than usual for the time of year, and there’s no reason to believe that traffic levels will increase substantially because they didn’t when Killingworth Road and Salters Bridge were both closed for road works.

Further information on the changes can be found on the Council’s Frequently Asked Questions web page.

SPACE for Gosforth response – Prohibition of driving of motor vehicles on local bridges

Dear sir/madam,

Re: Prohibition of driving of motor vehicles on local bridges

We are writing to SUPPORT the continued prohibition of driving of motor vehicles and associated changes made in the following orders, and to support these orders being made permanent.

We also wish to thank the Council for implementing the changes using an experimental order, to allow residents to experience the changes prior to them being implemented permanently. This has clearly led to much greater engagement and discussion of the pros and cons than would have been possible had the Council used a standard three-week online consultation. The consultation for the Broadway to Brunton Cycle lane, by comparison, only received 78 comments in total.

Our reasons for supporting the permanent prohibition of motor traffic on local bridges

1. Improved Safety

The Council has a legal obligation under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of pedestrian and cycling traffic.

These bridges and roads connecting to them frequently felt unsafe due to high volumes of traffic. Speeding counts, where we have them, also show that a majority of drivers using these routes do not drive within the 20mph speed limits set for these roads and nearby streets. As a result people choose either not to walk or cycle, or have to take long inconvenient detours to find an alternative way of reaching their destination. This is particularly true of Salters Bridge and Castle Farm Road, neither of which have adequate pavements.

The first of five principles in the world-leading Sustainable Safety approach is that roads should have a defined functionality e.g. for carrying traffic or alternatively for access to homes or destinations, and that street layouts should be designed accordingly. For minor residential streets this means restricting traffic only to vehicles being used to access those streets. It is also a pro-active approach, so changes should be made before crashes occur, rather than only reacting to past collisions and injuries.

https://sustainablesafety.nl

Council policy DM13 – Road Hierarchy confirms that all five bridges are on minor roads, and are for access only and not for the movement of vehicle traffic.

Council vehicle count and speed data confirms that there have been speeding issues on local streets connecting to these bridges as well as inappropriately high volumes of traffic.

For example, only 15% of drivers adhered to the speed limit on Ilford Road when measured in 2014.

It has also been established that injury rates per vehicle mile travelled are generally higher on minor roads. “For killed or seriously injured (KSI) casualties the rate per billion motor vehicle miles is 17% higher on minor roads (47 against 40 KSIs per billion vehicle miles), while for slight injuries it is 66% higher (188 against 123 slight injuries per billion vehicle miles).”

https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/10.1680/jmuen.16.00068

Evidence from the London Borough of Waltham Forest where low traffic neighbourhoods were implemented in 2015-2016 likewise found that “walking, cycling, and driving all became approximately 3-4 times safer per trip. There was no evidence that injury numbers changed on boundary roads.”

https://findingspress.org/article/18330-the-impact-of-introducing-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-on-road-traffic-injuries

In winter, ensuring vehicle traffic uses main roads that are on the Council’s gritting network, rather than cutting through untreated minor roads, also supports improved road safety. We understand residents’ concerns about Dene Crescent near Stoneyhurst Road bridge even though it is part of the Council’s gritting network. Hopefully the experience of the recent cold snap has reassured people that the Council’s gritting approach is effective. Certainly reports we have seen, and from our own regular walks in the area, suggest that Dene Crescent has been usable safely by motor vehicles.

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore both consistent with best practice for road safety and with Council Policy that implements that best practice.

2. Better Health and Physical Activity

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance on Physical activity and the environment NG90 paragraph 1.2.5 states “Ensure pedestrians, cyclists and users of other modes of transport that involve physical activity are given the highest priority when developing or maintaining streets and roads. (This includes people with limited mobility.)” One way it recommends for achieving this is to “Restrict motor vehicle access (for example, by closing or narrowing roads to reduce capacity).”

https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/NG90

The Council has confirmed there have been no issues with Emergency Services response times. This is consistent with what has been found elsewhere in the UK. A survey of Ambulance Trusts in areas where low-traffic neighbourhoods, popup cycle lanes, widened pavements and other walking and cycling schemes were introduced in response to the Covid-19 also found these have “have not hindered ambulance response times”.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/13/covid-bike-and-walking-schemes-do-not-delay-ambulances-trusts-say

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent with NICE Guidance NG90 to increase physical activity and improve health.

3. Improved local air quality

A review of air quality measures by Public Health England showed that “driving restrictions produced the largest scale and most consistent reductions in air pollution levels, with the most robust studies.”

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/improving-outdoor-air-quality-and-health-review-of-interventions

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent with best practice guidance for improving air quality.

We also wish to note that opening additional routes, for example by ending the prohibition of vehicle traffic on these local bridges, is not recommended in any best practice guidance or evidence for what is effective to improve air quality. Based on measurements we have seen we don’t believe there is increased pollution on any local main roads as a result of these orders but even if there was, re-allowing vehicle traffic on these local bridges would not be an appropriate or effective response to that pollution.

4. Increasing Walking

Research on London “mini-Holland” schemes, which make extensive use of vehicle prohibitions, estimated an average increase in walking of 32 minutes per week compared to people living in comparable areas with no mini-Holland.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2018/jun/26/mini-holland-schemes-have-proved-their-worth-in-outer-london-boroughs

While it is not certain that the limited vehicle prohibitions at local bridges will have such a strong effect, they are certainly consistent with measures that have been shown to increase walking levels and are unlikely to have any negative effects.

5. Enabling more people to cycle

Pre-lockdown traffic levels and speeds on both Hollywood Avenue and Castle Farm Road were high enough, according to Government Local Traffic Note 1/20, to exclude most people who might otherwise be willing to cycle. Even if they were technically open for cycling, in practice they were not.

Pre-lockdown traffic levels and speeds on Ilford Road, and possibly also Stoneyhurst Road itself, were by the same measure sufficient to exclude some or most people who might otherwise be willing to cycle.

In practice, although these roads were technically ‘open’ for all traffic including people to cycle many would choose not to, or would be forced into long inconvenient diversions to find an alternative safer way of reaching their destination.

The National Travel Attitude Study Wave 3, 2020, reported that nationally “66% either agree strongly or agree somewhat with the notion that cycling on roads is too dangerous“, with the figure being 72% for 65-74 year olds and 75% for over 74 year olds. Reducing traffic levels on roads near the bridges is a cheap and easy way to make roads safer so more people, especially older people, feel comfortable to cycle.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-travel-attitudes-study-wave-3

The Tyneside Bike Life survey found that “25% of all Tyneside residents do not cycle but would like to start. Yet only 33% of residents feel that cycling safety is good.“ while 86% said that it was important to improve routes and facilities for safe cycling.

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/bike-life/bike-life-tyneside

In Local Traffic Note (LTN) 1/20 section 7.3.1 it says “Encouraging through traffic to use main roads can provide benefits for pedestrians and residents, particularly children and vulnerable adults, as well as enabling cycling. This can be achieved through implementing measures such as turning bans and one way streets, and by mode filtering”

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120

The Newcastle City Council motion on cycling from September 2019, supported by Councillors in Dene and South Gosforth and Parklands wards, stated:

• Cycle and walking routes should be abundantly available especially within a 3-mile radius of the city centre or major transport interchanges.
• Cycle routes should wherever possible not share space with any road that experiences more than light traffic so that people feel safe on their bikes.

https://democracy.newcastle.gov.uk/documents/s150085/Minutes%2004092019%20City%20Council.pdf

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent both with Government guidance on how to remove barriers to cycling and with Council policy to enable cycling for local journeys and with the specific City Council motion on cycling.

To achieve high levels of cycling for local journeys the Council will need to continue to invest to create a good quality network of safe routes that can be used by all ages and abilities, not just by current cyclists who are willing to cycle on roads with heavy traffic. These orders are a step towards that aim.

6. Safer, healthier school travel

On 2 October 2020 the Council released a news story urging families to use alternatives to the car on the school run, saying that “Nationally, around half of all journeys to school for primary children are made by car, creating pollution and high traffic levels around schools. The council would like to see more people walking or cycling to school as part of their plans to reduce traffic in local neighbourhoods, making it clear that neighbourhood streets should prioritise people, not vehicles.”

https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/citylife-news/people-urged-ditch-car-walk-school-week-5-9-october

Asking people nicely hasn’t worked though. If the Council wants parents to walk or cycle with their children to school, the Council needs to provide safe routes to allow them to do so.

Research from Newcastle City Council over 10 years ago in 2009 showed just how many school pupils, especially those of Primary School age, wanted to cycle to school compared to those that actually did.

See Big Pedal 2016 – Final results for Gosforth

According to the Department for Transport, school traffic makes up one in four vehicles on the road at peak times, adding significantly to pollution and congestion.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/21/clean-air-campaigners-call-for-school-run-ban-cut-pollution

We also know that walking or cycling to school helps children concentrate better while at school.

http://sciencenordic.com/children-who-walk-school-concentrate-better

Salters Bridge, Stoneyhurst Road Bridge and Castle Farm Road are all useful active travel routes connecting to South Gosforth First School, Gosforth East Middle School, Gosforth Academy and St Mary’s High School.

Commonplace comments for Stoneyhurst Road Bridge note that parents have started to “park and stride” rather than drive all the way to the school gate.

We have previously summarised research showing parents would not be happy cycling with children on busy residential streets, which would include the roads connecting to these bridges, but would be willing to cycle on streets with no through traffic.

See: Lots of children want to cycle to school, but hardly any do. How do we make space for child cycling in Gosforth?

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent with Council policy and with research demonstrating that filtered streets are suitable for children to cycle and that children will benefit from an active travel journey to school.

By giving children greater choice in how to travel and enabling more independent travel his will also support Newcastle in its aim to become a UNICEF ‘Child Friendly City’.

7. Improving access to employment and the local economy

The Department of Transport report “The Value of Cycling” states that “Cycling facilities can overcome difficulties in accessing employment opportunities” as well as reducing staff turnover and absenteeism, and boosting productivity.

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

Salters Bridge, Stoneyhurst Road Bridge and Castle Farm Road are all useful active travel routes to major employment centres including The Freeman Hospital, the Ministry, the Regent Centre and Gosforth High Street. The Council’s Medium-Term Plan for 2021-22 and 2022-23 includes investing in transport as a way of supporting increases in employment including:

• developing local cycling and walking plans.
• developing Newcastle Streets for People and 15-minute neighbourhoods.

https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Build%20Forward%20Better%20-%20our%20medium-term%20plan%20for%202021-22%20and%202022-23.pdf

It has also been estimated that cycling more often rather than driving is the equivalent of an 8% pay increase, money that could be spent in the local economy.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/cycling-cost-saving-is-equivalent-of-an-8-per-cent-pay-rise-1-4430374

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent with Council Policy to support employment and the local economy.

8. Improving accessibility

Research by Sustrans found that ” An estimated 84% of disabled people living in the UK’s biggest cities never cycle for local journeys, yet one third (33%) say they would like to start cycling” and includes the recommendation “Reduce the volume and speed of vehicles on local streets, and create streets where people walking and cycling have priority, and cars are guests. ”

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/news/2019/june/one-third-of-disabled-people-in-uk-cities-would-like-to-start-cycling/

In the Tyneside Bike Life survey 2019, 68% of disabled people thought cycle safety needed to be improved and that only 8% of people who are disabled cycled once a week compared to 17% of people who are not disabled.

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/bike-life/bike-life-tyneside

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges can therefore support accessible and inclusive streets, along with further initiatives for example dropped kerbs, removing obstacles, widening pavements for wheelchair access, raising sections of roadway to make crossing easier, and ensuring on-street cycling facilities cater for the range of cycles used by disabled people.

Prior to these orders being put in place, the narrow pavement at Salters Bridge and complete lack of pavement on Castle Farm Road meant these routes were almost completely inaccessible for anyone with mobility issues unless using a vehicle, putting disabled people wanting to use these routes at a substantial disadvantage compared to people who are not disabled.

9. Reducing carbon emissions

Along with other local authorities in the NE of England, the Council has committed to make Newcastle upon Tyne carbon neutral by 2030. This was proposed in April 2019 by one of our local Dene and South Gosforth Councillors, the Council ward covering Stoneyhurst Road Bridge and Castle Farm Road, and was supported by Councillors in Dene and South Gosforth and Parklands wards.

https://democracy.newcastle.gov.uk/documents/s143777/April%20Council%20minutes.pdf

The Net Zero Newcastle – 2030 Action Plan says (p63) “Low Traffic Neighbourhoods implement the principle of ensuring vehicular traffic does not take precedence in residential areas. While people should be able to drive to residential neighbourhoods (if needed), they should not have the right to drive through. In line with the Carbon Management Hierarchy approach, through traffic should use the established road hierarchy”

https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/our-city/climate-change-newcastle/net-zero-newcastle-2030-action-plan

We know that when both Killingworth Road and Salters Bridge were closed to traffic due to recent road works there was an area-wide reduction in traffic levels and little or no increase on surrounding roads, strongly suggesting a reduction in the total number of vehicle miles driven.

The phenomenon of ‘Disappearing Traffic’ has been observed over and over around the world, including here in Newcastle when Killingworth Road was closed. It is well understood that reducing available capacity for vehicle travel reduces the number of vehicle journeys as people find other ways of doing what they need, which might include car sharing, using public transport, walking or cycling.

See: Roadworks, Air Quality and Disappearing Traffic

It has also been shown that vehicle miles driven are correlated to carbon emissions, but congestion levels are not. To reduce carbon emissions it therefore makes more sense to focus on reducing miles driven that aiming to reduce congestion.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/07/06/urban-myth-busting-congestion-idling-and-carbon-emissions/

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent with Council Policy both to become carbon neutral and to use Low Traffic Neighbourhood principles to achieve that, as well as being supported by strong scientific evidence. The use of Experimental Orders has also allowed action to be taken quickly, which is particularly important in light of the Council’s net zero targets and the Climate Emergency.

10. Enabling east-west walking and cycling across the Ouseburn and Metro

We have previously highlighted the lack of routes to cross the Ouseburn / Jesmond Dene if walking or cycling. We produced the map below prior to these orders being published.

These orders go a long way to addressing these concerns by providing traffic free routes across the Ouseburn at Salters Bridge and Castle Farm Road and reducing traffic on connecting streets. While gradient and lighting could potentially still be issues, a reduction in traffic reduces makes these routes far more usable and reduces the risks due to both.

Haddricks Mill – Alternative Routes before orders were implemented

Much the same is true of crossing the Metro line, where the main alternatives to Stoneyhurst Road are Station Road and Jesmond Dene Road, both main roads with heavy traffic that would put off most people from cycling. Consideration could also be given to prohibiting vehicle traffic on Moorfield Road bridge as part of a wider low traffic neighbourhood covering High West Jesmond and Ilford Road Metro.

11. Reducing Crime

Research looking at the London Borough of Waltham Forest showed that “The introduction of a low traffic neighbourhood was associated with a 10% decrease in total street crime (95% confidence interval 7% to 13%), and this effect increased with a longer duration since implementation (18% decrease after 3 years).”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348468915_The_Impact_of_Introducing_a_Low_Traffic_Neighbourhood_on_Street_Crime_in_Waltham_Forest_London

Northumbria Police has said “We have often called for environmental changes to address speeding and the closure of Salters Bridge will have a significant impact on speeding. It’s a far more effective way of addressing speed than relying on a camera van to be deployed.”

We have often called for environmental changes to address speeding and the closure of Salters Bridge will have a significant impact on speeding. It's a far more effective way of addressing speed than relying on a camera van to be deployed.

— Northumbria Police (@northumbriapol) August 13, 2020

This is likely to be true for other local bridges as well, including Ilford Road as a result of the order relating to Stoneyhurst Road bridge.

The approach to prohibit vehicle traffic at these local bridges is therefore consistent with objectives to reduce crime levels.

12. Impact on surrounding main roads

When the orders were first put in place some predicted ‘traffic chaos’ and ‘increased pollution’ as a result of these changes, but this has not happened and traffic is certainly no worse than it has been in previous years.

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/stoneyhurst-bridge-closure-traffic-gosforth-18681528

Traffic and Accident Data Unit (TADU) monitoring of vehicle traffic on Station Road, Gosforth High Street and Sandy Lane all show vehicle volumes did not exceed those in previous years even when lockdown was mostly lifted in September and October 2020. Haddricks Mill Road was slightly higher but that was more likely as a result of previous years being low due to Killingworth Road works rather than any additional traffic.

Traffic counts on Station Road shown in the graph below, show that by the time the orders were implemented on 13 August traffic levels had already returned to close to normal, and that implementing the orders made no substantial difference to the trend, which levelled off a few weeks later and stayed broadly flat after that.

Average daily traffic count 2017 – 2020, measured on Station Road, Gosforth

When Salters Road and Killingworth Road were both closed together pre-pandemic, traffic levels on Church Road were not significantly different, and Great North Road traffic levels were unchanged.

In September, when traffic was at its highest, air pollution at nearby sensors on Gosforth High Street were lower than normal.

Even if surrounding main roads were more congested and/or polluted than normal (which they weren’t) diverting traffic onto parallel minor roads would not be an appropriate response, and it is also very unlikely that it would be effective.

13. Value for Money

Interventions to support and enable more active travel are generally less costly than changes to roads to support or improve vehicle travel. Witness for example the hundreds of millions of pounds of public money being spent on the Western Bypass to add additional vehicle capacity, even though both local and national policy suggests that we should all drive fewer journeys in future.

The type of change proposed in these orders is almost certainly one of the cheapest, quickest and most effective way of enabling more people to walk and cycle more often and meet other policy objectives including addressing public health targets and the Climate Emergency.

They are also effective at improving road safety over a wide area, not just by the bridges.

• Castle Farm Road Bridge has reduced traffic and improved road safety right along the full length of Castle Farm Road.
• Salters Bridge has reduced traffic and improved road safety along the full length of Hollywood Avenue.
• Stoneyhurst Road Bridge has reduced traffic and improved road safety on Stoneyhurst Road and on Ilford Road / Rectory Drive.

Using experimental orders also means benefits can be achieved even more quickly at very low cost using temporary materials. This is especially important for issues such as the Climate Emergency that require urgent action to meet Council, national and global targets.

14. Public acceptance

Changes to street layouts almost always prove to be controversial initially, and longer-term tend to become more supported as people start to feel the benefits and realise that predictions of traffic chaos are unfounded, or at the very least have been substantially overstated.

This substantially explains the results from the local Councillor baseline survey, which was started a full month prior to the closures on 15 July 2020.

https://www.facebook.com/dsgward/posts/4094735390567874

We also note that the Commonplace website allows comments from any geographical location, so some of the comments are likely to be from people outside of the local area who use these bridges as short cuts as part of a longer journey to avoid busy main road routes.

When we surveyed Gosforth residents in 2018 we found 88% of residents supported safe walking and cycling routes to school and 85% supported reducing through traffic on residential streets.

This is consistent with more recent YouGov polling, which found that where people had opinions on LTNs, positive views were more than three times more prevalent than negative ones.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2020/oct/22/despite-a-loud-opposing-minority-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-are-increasingly-popular

There are many existing examples of local roads where motor vehicles are prohibited to prevent those roads being used for through traffic. All of these would have caused some vehicle journeys to be longer, and will have prevented main road traffic from using these streets as a short cut rather than sticking to main roads. None of these are controversial and no one is suggesting these should be opened for vehicle traffic to reduce congestion or pollution on adjacent main roads.

15. Enabling future changes to benefit active travel and health

Salters Bridge and Castle Farm Road Bridge orders are sufficient by themselves to improve safety adjacent minor roads including all of Hollywood Avenue.

In the area bounded by Gosforth High Street, Haddricks Mill Road and Church Road / Station Road, the prohibition of vehicle traffic on Stoneyhurst Road bridge improves safety but there are still nearby minor roads with high levels of vehicle traffic including Moor Road North and South (a signed cycle route) and The Grove.

In our blog “East Gosforth – Streets for People” we looked at one possible configuration of an area wide low traffic neighbourhood, which included a prohibition of vehicle traffic at Stoneyhurst Road bridge. This suggests that the Stoneyhurst Road Bridge order is consistent with and would enable a wider area low traffic neighbourhood in future and support the 15-minute neighbourhood concept.

East Gosforth – Streets for People

16. The Status Quo is not working

The status quo isn’t working. According to the Neighbourhoods and Public Health Report to Newcastle City Council on 3 February, 2020 Newcastle leads the “UK Healthy Cities Network”, but Newcastle is not currently a healthy city.

According to the 2019 report “for a typical Newcastle annual school reception intake of 3,500 children, 500 would be overweight, 460 obese and 120 severely obese.“ By Year 6 this increases to 540 overweight, 860 obese and 220 severely obese, together close to half of all children in Year 6.

https://democracy.newcastle.gov.uk/documents/s154182/Neighbourhoods%20Public%20Health%20Portfolio%20Report.pdf

According to Public Health England, less than half (45.7%) of children in Newcastle are considered to be physically active.

https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/profile/physical-activity/data#page/1/gid/1938132899/pat/6/par/E12000001/ati/201/are/E08000021/iid/93014/age/298/sex/4/cid/4/page-options/ovw-do-1_cin-ci-4_map-ao-4_car-do-0

The British Heart Foundation Physical Activity Report 2017 found that 42% of adults in the North East were classed as being inactive, putting them at greater risk of heart and circulatory disease.

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/publications/statistics/physical-inactivity-report-2017

In 2015, the BBC reported “A lack of exercise could be killing twice as many people as obesity in Europe, a 12-year study of more than 300,000 people suggests.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30812439

Currently relatively few people cycle (including children), and those that do are often forced into long inconvenient detours to avoid busy local streets.

The Tyneside Bike Life survey found that women, older and disabled people were then less likely to cycle in Tyneside but in all cases a majority wanted improvements in cycle safety. The report, to illustrate what could be possible, says “55% of all cycling trips in the Netherlands are made by women” where safe cycling facilities are widely available and “over 65 make 24% of their trips by cycle.”

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/bike-life/bike-life-tyneside

It is pretty clear that current cycling facilities in Newcastle, where most journeys involve having to use busy roads, mean women, older and disabled people are at a substantial disadvantage. These orders will help to address and remove that disadvantage.

As a result of high traffic levels people in Newcastle also suffer from congestion, pollution and every year people are killed and seriously injured on Newcastle’s roads through no fault of their own.

See: Traffic Crash Injury 2020 and Traffic Crash Injury 2019

Nationally, “motoring on minor roads doubled between 2009 and 2019.” This is not something we were ever consulted about, and if nothing is done will only get worse due to increasing availability of in-car Sat Nav systems.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/25/rat-running-residential-uk-streets-satnav-apps

Unless something is done now, these trends of increasing obesity, inactivity and ill health look set to continue while pollution and carbon emissions will not reduce. The Council has recognised that a “whole-systems approach to tackle rising obesity levels in the city” is needed.

https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/citylife-news/lifestyle/new-whole-systems-approach-tackling-obesity-newcastle

These orders support that whole-systems approach supporting a wide range of policy objectives covering health, economy, accessibility and the environment in a way that can be implemented quickly at a very low cost.

Summary and Next steps

In summary, we support the continued prohibition of driving of motor vehicles and associated changes made in the listed orders, and support these orders being made permanent.

Only a decision to make these orders permanent would align with Council policy. A decision to revoke these orders would make it harder for the Council to achieve its policy aims in future. This is also the perfect time to implement these changes while the roads are relatively quiet and people are willing to try out other ways of travelling around their local neighbourhoods.

“Doing nothing” or delaying action won’t encourage more people to walk or cycle, won’t improve health, won’t make it safer for children to travel to school and won’t reduce pollution or green house gas emissions.

We don’t believe there are any other alternative options currently available to the Council that would achieve the same level of benefits, for the same low cost across so many policy areas. Our assessment is that all of the substantive issues that have been raised, that we are aware of, can be adequately mitigated without re-opening these bridges to vehicle traffic.

The consultation has given residents the opportunity to share concerns. We hope the Council will assess these with due regard to the facts of the situation including any relevant evidence. For example, a comment by a member of the public opposing one of the bridge closures on our website asserts that, as a result of Stoneyhurst Road bridge being closed, people would be prevented from using their cars, which is clearly not true. The Council will also need to assess the impact of those false statements and other ‘trolling’ comments on Commonplace to determine whether these have skewed the overall consultation response.

For those concerns that are assessed to be factual and supported by relevant evidence, we hope the Council will give serious thought as to how those concerns could be addressed in a way that is consistent with Council policy and enables the prohibition of motor traffic at local bridges to be retained. For example:

• Using parking controls at the junction of Dene Crescent and Haddricks Mill Road to implement with Highway Code Rule 243, which says do not park opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction.
• Options for enabling vehicles travelling in opposite directions on Balmoral Terrace, Windsor Terrace, Sandringham Road and Audley Road to pass, no doubt made harder because more people are working at home so there are fewer gaps as residents’ cars remain parked all day.
• Implementing further “point closures” to link up walking and cycling routes and prevent traffic being displaced onto other local residential streets that aren’t part of the Council’s primary and secondary distributor road network.
• Creating a safe cycling link between Dene Crescent and Castle Farm Road along Haddricks Mill Road.
• Continued monitoring of pollution and traffic levels on distributor roads, including Church Road / Station Road, and consideration of (i) further road-space reallocation and better crossings in line with statutory guidance and (ii) extending the proposed Clean Air Zone so it bounded by he Tyne, the A1, the Metro line and the A19 as we set out in our response to the Council’s Air Quality consultation and (iii) other traffic demand management measures to improve quality of life for residents living on local distributor roads.

We also hope the Council will also use the feedback to identify suitable topics for future communications such as:

• Communication of objectives such as reducing air pollution and carbon emissions or making roads safer so more people will walk and cycle, and what road layout changes are likely to be needed to achieve those objectives.
• Communication to address popular misconceptions e.g. that “point closures” will increase emissions (they don’t) or that a large proportion of traffic will displace to adjacent streets (it doesn’t).
• Communication to explain the need to make road layout changes to direct through traffic onto distributor roads, which are safer and better-designed for higher volumes of vehicle traffic than local residential streets – and that it is neither appropriate nor acceptable to use local residential streets as alternative main road routes.
• Case studies showing where the Council has made these changes and the benefits achieved.

A number of organisations have provided a useful summary of evidence relating to low traffic neighbourhoods, which we have referenced in Appendix A. Linked SPACE for Gosforth blogs are listed in Appendix B.

Yours Sincerely,

SPACE for Gosforth

www.spaceforgosforth.com

Appendix A Summaries of evidence relating to low traffic neighbourhoods

Sustrans
https://www.sustrans.org.uk/for-professionals/infrastructure/an-introductory-guide-to-low-traffic-neighbourhood-design/an-introductory-guide-to-low-traffic-neighbourhood-design-contents/design-guide/all/5-a-guide-to-the-evidence-around-low-traffic-neighbourhoods

London Cycling Campaign
https://www.lcc.org.uk/articles/ltns-work-new-research-shows-evidence-of-success-on-multiple-criteria

We are Possible.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d30896202a18c0001b49180/t/60003fabf3791928a02b707f/1610629036655/LTN+Briefing_FINAL.pdf

Transport Findings
https://findingspress.org/article/18330-the-impact-of-introducing-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-on-road-traffic-injuries

Journal of Transport and Health
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140520301626

Rachel Aldred
http://rachelaldred.org/research/low-traffic-neighbourhoods-evidence/

Appendix B SPACE for Gosforth blogs

SPACE for Gosforth has produced three blogs relating to these orders.

1. We assessed a number of other concerns relating specifically to Stoneyhurst Road bridge in our blog “Stoneyhurst Bridge – Review of Concerns” published here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/stoneyhurst-bridge-review-of-concerns/
2. Our blog Enabling Safe Walking and Cycling via Local Bridges is published here: https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/enabling-safe-walking-and-cycling-via-local-bridges/
3. East Gosforth Streets for People – in which we propose a possible layout for a low traffic neighbourhood including the area around Stoneyhurst Road and show that closing Stoneyhurst Road Bridge to vehicle traffic would have minimal impact to most vehicle journey times. https://www.spaceforgosforth.com/east-gosforth-lcwip/

The post Safe Newcastle Bridges appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Earlier this year, Newcastle City Council updated its proposals for High West Jesmond as part of the overall Jesmond Streets for People plans. The council signalled that it was considering other options for how the budget might be used to improve walking and cycling.

The new plans published in March are set out on the High West Jesmond Residents’ website. This blog is about SPACE for Gosforth’s input to the process, which was shared with the Council at the end of March 2019. The original scheme is (at the time of writing) still available on the Streets for People website.

In this proposal we have considered a wider area bounded by Gosforth High Street, Church Road/Station Road and Haddricks Mill Road/Jesmond Dene Road, rather than just High West Jesmond. Looking at one area in isolation would have the potential to push traffic onto other residential streets, whereas looking at a wider area helps to avoid this.

We are sharing this as a draft and would welcome any feedback on the proposal itself and on the approach taken, which we have explained below. Although we don’t have detailed costings, our belief is that what we have proposed would lead to much greater benefits over a wider area at a much reduced cost, and at the same time would minimise the impact on residents who do need to drive for some journeys.

Streets for People – High West Jesmond

The Streets for People project overall aims to enable more people to walk and cycle in three areas, each of which has a budget of £1m funded by a grant from the Department of Transport’s Cycle City Ambition Fund.

The Council’s new proposals retain the cycle lane on Ilford Road between Moorfield and Jesmond Dene Road but other than that seem to have little benefit for walking or cycling. We were surprised the Ilford Road cycle lane was included in the Streets for People proposals as it was part of the recommendations from the Blue House working group so we expected it would be funded from that budget rather than diluting the Streets for People funding.

The other new proposals were to include speed bumps on Moorfield and at the junction with Ilford Road and continuous pavement on the north side of Moorfield. Based on experience elsewhere in Gosforth (Hollywood Avenue, Regent Farm Road), we wouldn’t expect speed bumps by themsleves to make any great difference to the liveability or safety of the street. Continuous pavement is usually used along main roads so may have the opposite effect and encourate people to believe that Moorfield is to be used as a main road for through traffic.

Issues and Concerns

There is a reasonable amount of data to describe issues in the area east of Gosforth High Street, including high or illegal levels of air quality on the surrounding main roads, and high volumes of traffic, much of which is speeding, on residential streets.

This data is backed up by comments shared by residents during the Streets for People and Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) consultations. Ilford Road, Moorfield and Moor Road South are frequently mentioned as problem streets with high traffic volumes and speeding.

High West Jesmond Residents’ Group held a meeting that resulted in similar comments shown in the slide below. This we previously reported in the SPACE for Gosforth blog about the original proposals. High West Jesmond Residents also produced their own blog setting out their concerns and thoughts in a bit more depth.

These broadly align both with the data and LCWIP / Streets for People consultation feedback.

The idea of a trial also makes sense as that would allow residents to evaluate changes to determine if concerns will be realised or if proposals might be improved prior to more permanent implementation.

Objectives and Opportunities

We also have data from the SPACE for Gosforth Your Streets – Your Views survey, which gives an  indication of what people will support and shows that reducing through traffic and safe walking and cycling routes to schools could be popular.

Separately, we know local Councillors support similar aims, below from the 2018 local Council elections. These include the option to trial interventions.

Bringing these together we can come up with some objectives for this proposal before even looking at what measures might be implemented.

So, for this proposal we are aiming to meet the Streets for People objectives, reduce speeding traffic, make it safer to walk and cycle to schools and reduce traffic on residential streets.

We have also noted concerns about displacing traffic on to other residential streets and longer journey times by car.

By residential streets we mean streets that enable access to people’s homes but aren’t designated for through traffic. In the map above red lines show the routes of ‘primary distributor’ roads for through traffic including Jesmond Dene Road and Haddricks Mill Road. Orange lines show ‘secondary distributor’ roads including Gosforth High Street, Church Road and Station Road. These define the boundary of the area we are looking at, which goes beyond the current scope of Jesmond Streets for People but needs considering as one.

None of Moorfield, Moor Road North or South, Ilford Road or The Grove are designated for through traffic but all carry relatively high volumes of vehicles, many of which are currently using those streets as if they are main roads.

Analysis

Looking at a map of this area, it is noticeable how the area is already split by the Metro line and an east-west line including The Valley and the grounds of South Gosforth First School. Travel between these areas is limited to one or two options whether you are walking, cycling or driving.

To help with the analysis we have split the area into three sub-areas each with limited connectivity to the other. So, High West Jesmond forms one of these areas connecting north via either Moor Road South or Ilford Road.

We haven’t included areas west of Moor Road or The Admirals (Beatty Avenue, Sturdee Gardens, Keyes Gardens) as these are already quiet streets with little through traffic.

For each of these areas we have used Google Maps directions to determine how long it would take to travel to Blue House, Haddricks Mill and to the High Street / Salters Road junction, and what options there are for routes. All journeys to or from the area by car would have to go through one of these junctions.

For example, Google Maps gives three different options for travelling from High West Jesmond to Haddricks Mill. One via Moor Road South / The Grove, one via Ilford Road and a third via Haddricks Mill Road. At 8.30am on a Monday morning the Haddricks Mill Road route is the quickest. We have used 8.30am on a Monday so that we take account of peak traffic on main roads and as this is also when children are travelling to school.

Travelling from High West Jesmond to Gosforth High Street, two routes are equally quick by car. One via Gosforth High Street and the other via Moor Road North. Of these it would be preferable to route traffic via Gosforth High Street which is designated for through traffic rather than Moor Road North which is a residential street.

In the other direction, the quickest route calculated at 5pm on a Monday afternoon is via Blue House roundabout.

Using these calculations and a few others not shown, we can determine the quickest vehicle routes to and from High West Jesmond. These do not require the use of Ilford Road and only use Moor Road South in a northerly direction.

The map belows shows what happens when the same analysis is repeated for the areas marked out by purple and orange dashed lines. From the purple area the quickest car journeys are via Church Road/Church Avenue/Station Road to the High Street and Haddricks Mill, and to Blue House via The Grove. The orange area is the same except that the quickest journey to Blue House is via Haddricks Mill Road.

Having completed this analysis we can draw some conclusions.

1. If Ilford Road south of Rectory Avenue and Stoneyhurst Road at the Metro bridge were closed to vehicle traffic it would make no real difference to journey times by car. Some people who previously used those routes but change to using quicker routes may see their journey time reduce.
2. If the southern end of Moor Road South was made northbound-only that also would make no difference to journey times.

Continuing the analysis, making the southern end of Moor Road North south-bound only where it meets The Grove would stop north-bound traffic using Moor Road North as an alternative to the High Street, again without impacting journey times. Residents returning to St Nicholas Avenue, Belle Vue Avenue and Rectory Grove from Blue House can travel via the Grove / Church Avenue.

Making these changes would dramatically reduce the amount of traffic on the estate while making very little difference to journey times by car for residents. The one exception would be The Grove but this could be closed to through traffic between Grove Park Crescent and Stoneyhurst Road West. In this case residents of St Nicholas Avenue, Belle Vue Avenue and Rectory Grove would use Grove Park Crescent to access their properties. Although this would displace some traffic to Grove Park Crescent it is likely to be fairly small.

Reducing through traffic also makes the roads safer and more pleasant for walking and cycling, and safer for children travelling to local schools.

Proposal

Clearly any analysis like this won’t capture every consideration, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth trying. We would also like your feedback, as described at the end of this blog, to help us refine and improve this proposal if possible.

Our draft proposal submitted to Streets for People was to use temporary measures to stop through traffic on Ilford Road, make the south end of Moor Road North one way going south, and the south end of Moor Road South one way going north. These could be made permanent if the trial is successful. The remainder of Moor Road North and South would still have two-way traffic.

We would also propose stopping through traffic at the Stoneyhurst Road Metro bridge on a similar basis along with a “school street”  on Alnmouth Drive to further improve safety for children travelling to and from school.

Possibly some of the traffic that was using residential streets might re-route via the local main road network, but given closing Killingworth Road didn’t lead to an increase in traffic on The Great North Road nor Benton Lane, the impact is likely to be minimal.

While any initial implementation is likely to use temporary materials to confirm the approach works, longer term we hope the closures might be used to introduce more greenery. A good example of how this has been done is at Ampton Street nor far from Kings Cross Station, where part of the road has been replaced by gardens with planting and seats.

Evaluation and Feedback

Looking back at the objectives, we think this proposal would do what we set out to achieve. With less traffic, local streets become quieter and more liveable and better for walking and cycling. A similar scheme at Waltham Forest resulted in increased levels of walking and cycling, and is expected to lead to substantial health benefits for those living in the area.

That’s our view but we would like to hear your feedback as well. Specifically:

1. If you live in the area, would the proposal make it easier or harder for you to travel or encourage you to travel differently?
2. If harder please do give us details of the journey that might be worse. E.g. starting street or area and approximate destination and how and when you travel.
3. Any other related concerns not met by the proposal.

The post East Gosforth – Streets for People appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

The Regent Centre is one of the main destinations in Gosforth along with Gosforth High Street. Built in the 1970s on the site of the former Coxlodge Colliery, Regent Centre was at one time one of the largest office complexes in Europe. Now it includes the Gosforth swimming pool, library and Civic Theatre, as well as being close to several schools and the Regent Centre Metro and bus interchange.

We have taken a look and have come up with a set of proposals to improve walking and cycling access so that office workers, children and families can get to work, school or other local facilities. If you can think of further improvements or other issues that might need resolving please do let us know though.

The map below shows the area we have looked at, including the route of improved walking and cycling facilities connecting St Charles Primary School on the left and Archbishop Runcie First School on the right.

This route connects into the current north-south cycle route that comes from Parklands down the Great North Road, turns into Christon Road and the goes south via Alwinton Terrace. The Great North Road cycle route also needs improving north of Christon Road where there are only narrow painted lanes, and south to connect into Gosforth High Street. Taken together this is the “Gosforth Plus” cluster of destinations we identified in our top level Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) assessment for Gosforth.

One of the strangest features of the Regent Centre is the enormous roundabout. Measuring on Google Earth, this is about 55m across, or about the same area as eleven tennis courts. The road width is about 9m, which is about enough space to park two buses and two cars all side by side. As it stands this is a massive wasted space and the very wide road encourages dangerous speeding traffic.

These super-size dimensions are an opportunity to create a new usable green space without impacting vehicle access, roughly as laid out below.

This new green space connects to the library and swimming pool, and could include benches or play equipment, or additional trees and planting. It’s in a great location that could be used for families to sit and relax after visiting the pool, for office workers to relax during their lunch breaks or for the gym to run outdoor exercise sessions.

It also means one less road crossing for people walking east to west and a much more direct route. Vehicle traffic would still have access as the current north and west sides of the roundabout would become a two way road. This could be implemented very quickly using a few planters to mark out the edge of the new road in advance of permanent landscaping.

Outside the Gosforth Civic Theatre and Eagle Star House there is a bit less space but still sufficient to have separate walking and cycling routes. We have spoken to the developers for Eagle Star House and the Civic Theatre who are both okay in principle with the proposal.

This is what the route could look like by Eagle Star House, with children able to travel by bike safely away from the traffic to St Charles School or to the swimming pool or library.

On Christon Road, on the east of the Great North Road, there is also space to widen the pavement to include a separate lane for cycling, mostly for the use of children on the way to Archbishop Runcie and Gosforth Central Middle schools to keep them safe from school traffic and vehicles accessing the industrial estate.

The current Great North Road crossing is entirely inadequate at busy times because the Council has designed the junction to have a two-stage pedestrian crossing to increase vehicle traffic, but which requires people crossing to cram into a narrow ‘sheep pen’ in the middle of the road.

In the picture below, people on the left have given up even trying to fit into the ‘sheep pen’ and are just using any bit of pavement available. The picture also shows that the crossing is already used by children on bikes.

If this were a single stage crossing, there would be plenty of space for both walking and cycling, and the crossing itself could be adapted by simply removing the railings giving more space for everyone to cross. This would also reduce the danger to children stuck at the edge of the crossing.

We mentioned above the need to improve connectivity north for cycling. There is plenty of space available here to create protected cycle lanes that would be suitable for all ages and abilities. The picture below shows unused space in the middle of the road and there are also railings on the right of the picture that could be removed.  Arguably there is over-provision for vehicles at this location as all that should really be needed is one all-vehicle lane in each direction and an additional south-bound bus lane.

In this proposal we have included more green space and provided new safer walking and cycling routes to schools. These were the top two responses to the SPACE for Gosforth Your Streets – Your Views survey with close to 90% support from residents for both. The changes, if implemented, should also result in a safer crossing of the Great North Road and more places to sit, especially at the new roundabout garden green space.

It is just a proposal though and we are sure it can be improved further. If you have any suggestions please do let us know via the comments below.

This is a video we made in 2016 to show what cycling is like at the Regent Centre.

The post Regent Centre appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

SPACE for Gosforth has produced some air pollution banners for local schools for Clean Air Day 2019.

Air pollution is a serious issue in Gosforth due to high volumes of traffic travelling through Gosforth High Street and Haddricks Mill junction.

Children aren’t responsible for this pollution but they are affected by it, not just when travelling by car or on main roads, but also outside schools and in car parks where there are lots of vehicles in a small area.

As adults, and as parents, this is something we can do something about. No one wants their children to be breathing in dirty air from other people’s exhaust fumes.

If you have just seen one of the banners and want to find out more, you’ll find more information below, including links to data sources.

If you want to know more about the health risks of air pollution and what you, the Government and Newcastle City Council can do about it, please also read on.

1. What’s the problem with school traffic and air pollution?

According to the Department for Transport, school traffic makes up one in four vehicles on the road at peak times. And yet children are amongst the most likely to be made ill by air pollution.

According to the British Lung Foundation “Children are more vulnerable to breathing in polluted air than adults. For their size, they breathe more air each minute than an adult. Buggies and prams put them at the level of car exhausts.“

The Royal College of Physicians estimate that in the UK 40,000 deaths a year are linked to air pollution and that air pollution impacts the development of unborn children with additional risk of miscarriage, is linked to asthma, diabetes, dementia, obesity and cancer, and increases the risk of heart attacks and strokes for those in later life.

Children who are taken to school by car will also be exposed to more air pollution than children who walk or cycle, even if they walk or cycle on the same polluted streets. This is because pollution from vehicle exhaust fumes is more concentrated in the middle of the road. According to the Governement’s Air Quality Plan, vehicles are responsible for 80% of roadside air pollution.

2. What is the Government doing about air pollution?

In July 2017 the Government instructed local authorities to produce new plans to meet air pollution targets for nitrogen dioxide (chemical name NO₂) in the shortest possible timescales.

Although air quality had been improving, legal limits in force since 2010 have still not been met and in 2016 the UK High Court ruled that the Government’s plans at the time were so poor as to be illegal.

In the North East, illegal levels of air pollution are still being recorded in Newcastle, Gosforth, Gateshead (by the Tyne Bridge), North Tyneside (the Coast Road), Durham and Sunderland.

Illegal Air Pollution in Newcastle city centre in 2017

The approaches that are most effective at reducing air pollution are reducing vehicle volumes e.g. through access restrictions or road charging, or cleaner engines.

The Tyneside Councils’ proposal included two alternatives for charging: a Charging Clean Air Zone or tolls on the Tyne bridges. The later option also included access restrictions where older more polluting buses, taxis and HGVs would not be allowed in Newcastle city centre.

3. What can I do?

If you can manage it, a walk or cycle to school is a great way to start the day. Children who walk or cycle to school have been found to do better in class because they arrive refreshed, fit and ready to learn.

It’s not just good for the children either. A study of 250,000 UK commuters showed that adults who walk or cycle substantially reduce their risk of cancer and heart disease.

If you do need to use a car please consider “Park and Stride” – parking away from the school and walking the last few hundred meters. If the school has a dedicated car park, please don’t idle your engine and let other parents know why they should turn off their engines as well.

If you are worried about walking on polluted streets, it may be possible to find a quieter route, but even if you can’t it has been shown that the health benefits of cycling and walking ‘outweigh air pollution risk’.

Air Pollution Colouring Picture

4. What else could the Council do?

We know, when thinking about walking or cycling with children, it isn’t a simple matter of choice and that there are real and serious barriers that make it harder for families to walk or cycle.

SPACE for Gosforth has spent the last three years looking at how to make it easier and safer for residents of all ages and abilities to walk or cycle around Gosforth.

We know from Council measurements that some residential streets have high levels of traffic and speeding vehicles and that speeds over 20mph dramatically increase risk for children. We have done a “blind walk” on Gosforth High Streetthat highlighted lots of issues for people with visual impairments.

We have found research that shows where parents will allow their children to cycle, and that for the most part current road layouts don’t meet that standard. We have assessed local streets for whether they support inclusive cycling for people who cannot use a standard bicycle.

There are also pleny of good local examples of low-traffic neighbourhoods where it is safe for children to travel and to play out.

Safe routes and low traffic neighbourhoods

Your voice is important. If you want streets that are safe for children, please do speak to your school and let Local Councillors know about what would help you and your family.

If you live in or travel through Gosforth you can join SPACE for Gosforth, sign up to our email list or join in the discussion on Facebook or Twitter.

Thank you for your support.

The post NO2 Air Pollution appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

Newcastle City Council is after feedback about your experience of walking and cycling around Newcastle and how that experience could be improved. This might include better pavements, better crossings, more space for cycling, improved junctions, lower vehicle speeds or less traffic.

This is being done in support of the national Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy, which outlines the Government’s ambition “to make cycling and walking a natural choice for shorter journeys, or as part of longer journeys by 2040”. Ultimately this should result in a network of good quality walking and cycling routes where people feel safe and which can be used by all ages and abilities.

Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts and ideas on the consultation website. Please do also read through comments other people have made about the routes you use and, if you agree, ‘like’ those comments to show your agreement. Every comment or like is a piece of evidence the Council can use to determine what improvements are most needed and the order in which they should be implemented.

The consultation is open until 8 March 2019.  There are drop-in events too during February.

How will this feedback be used?

The rest of this blog is to explain the process from gathering information in the above consultation through to the creation of a prioritised list of improvements that together will form the Newcastle Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). This is based on the Government’s LCWIP Technical Guidance.

Newcastle is one of 38 Local Authorities that have been asked by the Government to produce a Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan.

The Government’s LCWIP Objectives

These are the objectives included in the LCWIP technical guidance that set out for Local Authorities what each LCWIP should aim to achieve.

These align with SPACE for Gosforth’s own aims for healthy, liveable, accessible and safe neighbourhoods.

Key amongst these are “streets where cyclists and walkers feel they belong, and are safe”, “places designed for people of all abilities and ages so they can choose to walk or cycle with ease”, and “more networks of routes around public transport hubs and town centres, with safe paths along busy roads”.

Process

The technical guidance also sets out the process in which the key actives are network planning for walking and network planning for cycling, which we will focus on below.

Planning for public and stakeholder engagement is part of stage 1.

Gathering Information

The LCWIP guidance identifies a range of data sources, many of which SPACE for Gosforth has already looked at including traffic volumes and speeds, air quality and collision data. Newcastle City Council has also commissioned its own surveys including the Bike Life Report and sought residents input via its Streets for People project covering Jesmond, Heaton and Ouseburn, Arthurs Hill and Fenham. Information from the consultation referenced at the top of this blog will also be fed into the process.

Network Planning – Origins and Destinations

Network planning for walking and cycling are similar in that both require the identification of origins and destinations. Typically origins will be residential areas and destinations will be shops, schools, workplaces and transport hubs. The walking and cycling networks should support journeys from residential areas to destinations but also between destinations e.g. for someone walking or cycling from the offices at Regent Centre to the High Street for their lunch.

Once origins and destinations have been determined, the next step is to group those that are close together e.g. Gosforth library, swimming pool and Regent Centre offices might all be in one cluster.

We have created a map of destinations for Gosforth. If you think we have missed any destinations please let us know via the comments below.

Core Walking Zones and Key Walking Routes

To determine where to focus walking improvement, the technical guidance suggests identifying Core Walking Zones, which are locations where there are multiple destinations in the same area.

Having identified the core walking zones, the next steps are to identify the main current and potential walking routes to and from the core walking zones.  Part of the analysis is to look at ‘severance’ where a walking route has a dog-leg as a result of some sort of barrier, which in Gosforth might include Metro lines, boundaries of housing estates and the Town Moor. Potential improvements to reduce severance might include new footpaths or a new bridge over the Metro line.

The diagram below shows the SPACE for Gosforth proposal for a Gosforth High Street “Core Walking Zone” and other nearby destinations.  Potential improvements for walking are listed at the end of this blog but for the High Street could include removing street clutter, additional planting or seating, and reducing traffic speeds.

Network Planning for Cycling 

For cycling, the aim is to create a network of routes that connect origins and destinations, with the aim that adjacent routes within the network should not be any more than 400m apart. Routes should be of a consistent quality so that they can be used by all ages and abilities.

We set out the process for creating a cycling network in our SPACE for Gosforth blog: Building a Safe Cycling Network for Gosforth. The LCWIP process is very similar to this. The key stages are:

1. Identifying and grouping origins and destinations.
2. Identifying desire lines between origins and destinations.
3. Converting desire lines into preferred routes.
4. Considering additional requirements such as signage and cycle parking.

We have used the Government guidance to produce what a potential cycle network map covering Gosforth and nearby areas could look like.

Any routes proposed, including those in the map above, would need to be assessed against the following specified design standards.

• Coherent: i.e. to be of consistent quality, easy to navigate and linking places where people want to go, such as the local destinations on the map above.
• Direct: to encourage people to use the routes rather than shorter alternatives that may not be so suitable for cycling and “to make cycling preferable to driving“.
• Safe: especially reducing vehicle speeds and removing the need for people cycling to come into close proximity with motor traffic.
• Comfortable: minimal stopping and starting and avoiding conflict with other road users.
• Attractive.

The guidance also states that “As well as the key routes that join origin and destination points, there is a wider network of quiet streets. While it can be assumed that conditions generally are acceptable for cycling due to lower speeds and volumes of motor traffic, some routes will require infrastructure improvements. For example at junctions with busy roads, or to cross physical barriers such as rivers, canals and railway lines.”

We can see in Gosforth that the network developed so far falls short of these measures, for example on the Great North Road and Gosforth High Street there are a wide variety of different route types some of which involve cycling in heavy traffic.

In our blog Building a Safe Cycling Network for Gosforth we included the following assessment showing protected / traffic-free cycling routes in green and low-traffic neighbourhoods enclosed in blue.  It is clear from this that there is a substantial amount to do in Gosforth to meet the Government’s ambition for cycling to be a natural choice for shorter journeys.

Prioritisation and Local Policy

The final stages of the LCWIP cover prioritisation of improvements based on ease of implementation and likely benefit, and embedding the LCWIP into Council policy.

The LCWIP is already referenced in the Council’s Development and Allocation Plan, which SPACE for Gosforth has written about previously, and once the LCWIP has been produced, new developments will be required to link into the LCWIP walking and cycling networks.

Please don’t forget to add your comments!

Appendices

A – Potential Improvements for Walking 

B – Potential Data Sources for the Information Gathering Stage

C – Core Design Outcomes for Cycling (and Walking)

The post A Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan for Gosforth appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stone / Concrete shelter with measurements

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

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

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

2) Unintended negative consequences.

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

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

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

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

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

Existing bus stop by Melton Park

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

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

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

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

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

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

d) Difficult to clean if subject to graffiti.

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

Slide on Bus Shelters presented by the City Council in January

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

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

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

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

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

d) Real time / data ready.

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

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

5) Conditions for an effective consultation.

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

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

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

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

Extract from the Newcastle City Council Street Charter

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

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

Notice displayed in the Great North Road bus shelters

Next Steps

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

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

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

Yours faithfully,

On behalf of SPACE for Gosforth
www.spaceforgosforth.com

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

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

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

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

Residents’ feedback on the proposals from the Commonplace website.

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

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

https://youtu.be/6ryvzvla1sQ

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

Consultation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Design Changes

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

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

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

The Three Mile Inn Toucan Crossing

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

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

Three Mile Inn Toucan Crossing – Original Plan

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

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

Three Mile Inn – Final Plans

McCracken Park to Polwarth Drive

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

Polwarth Drive roundabout – Original Plans

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

Traffic Volumes and Speeds on the Great North Road Service Road

The final plans also show:

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

Polwarth Drive roundabout – Final Plans

Newlands Avenue to Norwood Avenue

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

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

Newlands Avenue to Norwood Avenue – Final Plans

Brunton Lane

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

Brunton Lane – Original Plans

Brunton Lane – Final Plans

Requests for change not incorporated into the final plans

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

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

Street Trees and Bus Shelters

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

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

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

Extract from the original plans

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

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

Lessons

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

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

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

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

Update 8/1/2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

Update 9/2/2018

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

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

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

Broadway to Brunton Update February 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

Can we use an alternative site compound?

 Yes, an alternative site compound is being used.

 What is the timeline for removal of trees?

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

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

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

What information is available on trees?

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

What is the situation with the bus shelters?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why are bus lanes out of action?

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

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

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

Please can we have a breakdown of costs?

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

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

Where is the funding coming from?

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

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

Please can you explain the increase in costs?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cycling is a healthy, low cost, low impact way of travelling but currently for many people in Gosforth it is not a viable choice. Although cycling is a relatively safe activity in itself and suitable for many everyday journeys, Gosforth’s roads often feel very dangerous because they are so busy with traffic, especially at rush hour and when children are travelling to or from school.

In our post National Walking Month – May 2017 we asked you to help us document locations in Gosforth where there were issues with walking and to share ideas for how Gosforth could be improved for walking. In this post we want to do the same for cycling.

Background

1. How Gosforth as a whole might benefit from a safe cycling network

Local authorities are required by law to “to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement” for cycling as well as for vehicle traffic and for pedestrians. That in itself should be sufficient to expect a safe and direct cycle network, but there are further proven benefits that mean investing in cycling facilities gives a very high return on investment compared to other road schemes. For example:

• Desirable Neighbourhoods. Designing streets to be cycle friendly makes them better for everyone: less traffic, less noise, less air pollution, safer for children to play, and can increase property prices.
• Air Quality. The chair of the government’s independent advisors on air quality COMEAP have recently confirmed that in order to meet air quality targets we will need not just cleaner vehicles but also fewer vehicles and “as much active transport in the form of walking and cycling as is feasibly possible.” Plus, children cycling are less exposed to pollution than if they were in a car.
• Road Safety. Introducing cycle lanes separated from traffic have been found to reduce injuries from road collisions for all road users including for people walking and driving.
• Public Health. Safer cycle lanes encourage more people to cycle, which leads to all sorts of health benefits and reduces the burden on the NHS, which all tax-payers contribute to.
• Economy. Cycling means people can make the same journeys for less cost, which when added across all journeys contributes to a significant economic benefit including locally where good quality cycling facilities can boost the local economy.
• Feeling Good. Cycling to work can help you be less stressed and more productive. Children who walk or cycle to school tend to be more attentive and achieve better results and that also means less school run traffic to hold up other drivers.
• Road Capacity. One of the main purposes of main roads is to help people to get from A to B. Because bikes are much smaller than cars, far more people can travel on the same road if cycling than if everyone was to drive.

That’s not to say everyone has to cycle. Many of these benefits can be achieved even with a small shift from driving to cycling, which initially could just be from the 24% of people who cycle once a month or more in Newcastle leaving their car at home a bit more often. Allowing those who can cycle to do so takes traffic off the road that would otherwise be holding up those who do need to drive.

2. Features of good quality cycling networks

The key features of a good cycling network are well understood and are very similar to what is needed for a walking network.

1. It links where people live with where they want to go to.
2. It is sufficiently dense that you are never too far from a safe cycle route.
3. Routes and junctions are safe and feel safe. This includes making sure there is sufficient lighting and avoiding isolated locations as well as ensuring protection from fast moving vehicles.
4. Everyone can use it: older or younger people, families and groups, confident cyclists and those that are less confident, people with disabilities, and all travelling at a range of different speeds.
5. It needs to be safe for key journeys e.g. to/from school and not just on a Sunday morning when roads are quiet anyway.
6. It doesn’t put people cycling into conflict with other road users.
7. Routes are direct to avoid adding unnecessary time and effort to journeys.
8. It is coherent so different routes connect and there is no need to get off and push.
9. It is intuitive, comfortable and attractive to use even if you do not cycle regularly.

A good quality cycling network would help prevent injuries. The map below from crashmap.co.uk shows where people cycling have been injured in Gosforth due to road traffic collisions from 2007 to 2016.

Injuries to people cycling that could have been prevented. Road Traffic Collisions 2007-2016 www.crashmap.co.uk

3. Networks for cycling vs road networks for motor vehicles

For any form of transport to be viable, there has to be a connected network of routes that link where people live and destinations such as schools, shops and workplaces. That is true whatever the mode of transport whether cycling, driving, walking or using public transport.

The density of a transport network – how close routes are to each other – depends on its purpose. The motorway network and national rail have just one north-south route each passing through NE England, whereas the network of pavements and paths used for walking in cities  cover almost every street.

The map below shows a view of the main local road network for vehicle traffic in Gosforth and surrounding areas. Local through roads are shown in red, which shows a density of about one road every one kilometre. Streets not marked red are typically residential areas where the function of the street is much more about the place rather than enabling through traffic. Currently many of these streets, shown in orange, are also very busy with traffic.

Cycle network guidance based on cities with existing high levels of cycling suggests a mesh of one route every 250m, although the Department of Transport have recommended a less ambitious target of one every 400m. As Newcastle, in common with most UK cities, currently has very little by way of a cycle network, a more realistic initial target would be for there to be one route every one kilometre, in this case similar to the local road network.

These cycle routes don’t have to follow the local road network if good alternatives are available, though they do need to meet the criteria above especially connecting homes and destinations and being direct to avoid adding unnecessary time and effort to journeys.

In our blog Lots of children want to cycle to school, but hardly any do. How do we make space for child cycling in Gosforth? we summarised what parents think would make an acceptable safe cycling route for a 12 year old cycling by themselves. Typically for main local through routes this would require physical separation from traffic. Roads with no through motor traffic were also acceptable.

This map from the Strava website shows current cycling routes used by people registered on the Strava website, with thicker lines representing higher numbers of people cycling. Almost certainly actual numbers will be higher than this as many more people will not be registered on Strava. Potentially they could be higher still if not limited by the existing road conditions, in particular where people do not feel safe cycling on Gosforth’s busy roads. Building safe cycling networks has been shown across multiple studies to increase the number of people using those routes.

4. Destinations in Gosforth where people want to travel to

Overlaying local destinations on the map it is clear that many are located on or near main roads, in particular on the Great North Road and Gosforth High Street. We listed some of the destinations for children and families on Gosforth High Street in the SPACE for Gosforth post 20 mph – the right speed for Gosforth’s children. These are the places that people want and need to go to regardless of how they travel.

5. Current cycling provision in Gosforth

Travelling on the quieter residential streets we see many people who are cycling to work, or to the shops or to meet friends.  It is also possible to avoid much of the traffic (and danger) if you know when and where to cycle, and are prepared to take longer, less direct journeys to get to your destination.

The lack of a wider safe network does significantly limit the wider take up of cycling though. From the 2015 Bike Life report for Newcastle:

• only 38% of people rate cycling safety in Newcastle as good or very good.
  
• only 25% of people believe that safety for children riding a bike is good or very good.
• 8 in 10 residents want better safety for people riding bikes.
• 27% of residents do not ride a bike but would like to.

If Gosforth is evaluated against the features of a good cycling network (as set out above) and the road characteristics that parents would consider to be safe for riding with their children, the conclusion can only be that currently local provision is poor.

The map below shows:

• In green, mostly around the edges of Gosforth, traffic-free routes which would be acceptable for families cycling with children.
• In blue, streets where there are no through routes, which would be considered safe where traffic volumes are low. In much of Newcastle this is standard but it is still relatively unusual in Gosforth. Generally in these areas with no through routes no specific changes are needed to support cycling.
• In yellow, other painted cycle lanes and light separation using Orcas on the Great North Road between Regent Centre and Broadway roundabout, neither of which would be considered safe for children.
• In red, major roads with no cycling facilities of any form where anyone wishing to cycle (including children) would currently be expected to share the road with large numbers of cars, buses, vans and HGVs.

Comparing this to the destinations map it shows that most destinations in Gosforth are not served by any safe cycling route acceptable for families cycling with children. Note also that we have not included signposted cycle routes, such as Moor Road North / South, where there is no separately marked space for cycling as the signposting is not sufficient by itself to make the route suitable for families with children. 

Clearly from this map there is plenty of room for improvement, both in terms of creating a safe connected network linking homes and destinations and for more immediate quick wins to connect together quieter areas or to improve safety and liveability for residential streets.

Creating a safe cycling network for old, young and everyone in between

To help with creating a safe cycling network we are looking for your thoughts about:

• Specific locations where small changes could help link up existing safe routes (‘missing links’).
• Possible route alignments for cross-city cycle routes that go through Gosforth e.g. from Kingston Park to Gosforth Business park via Broadway and Heathery Lane (a 14 minute journey by bike according to Google Maps).
• Issues with existing routes that make them difficult or impossible to use, including where there are issues for non-standard cycles such as those towing a child trailer and cycles used as mobility aids.
• Existing quiet routes that might not be obvious to others who don’t know the area.
• Dangerous junctions or stretches of road that are hard to avoid.
• Destinations e.g. schools or shops that are hard to reach by bicycle.
• Shared space that creates unnecessary conflict with pedestrians or other vulnerable users.
• Anything else that makes cycling less attractive as a way of getting round compared to other modes of traffic.

Please share your ideas via the comments section below or via the SPACE for Gosforth Facebook page and we will add them to our on-line map.

The post Building a Safe Cycling Network for Gosforth appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.

The first ever UK Clean Air Day will take place on 15 June 2017.  On this day, people will be encouraged to run an event, raise awareness of this issue and to make some simple changes to their lifestyle to begin the process of cleaning up the UK’s filthy air.

The effects of air pollution on children’s health are becoming a matter of increasing concern. Children travelling inside cars are also at risk and Prof Sir David King (the chief scientific adviser to the UK government) recently issued a stark warning to parents.

One SPACE for Gosforth member was so concerned about cars idling by his children’s school that he designed two posters and a colouring picture for the school to use to educate children and parents about this issue.  We are privileged to publish his posters and colouring picture, and we hope that other schools and children’s groups might find it useful to encourage drivers to change their behaviour to protect children’s health.

Click on these links to download the posters and the colouring picture.  Further resources to campaign against car idling can be found on the UK Clean Air Day website.

The South Gosforth AQMA

SPACE for Gosforth regularly shares our members’ concerns on this issue as we campaign to improve Gosforth’s air quality.

We were very concerned to see levels of nitrogen dioxide visibly rose following Black Friday last year.

City Centre AQMA

High levels of nitrogen dioxide in our community led to Newcastle City Council declaring the South Gosforth Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) in 2008.  This is one of Newcastle upon Tyne’s 2 AQMAs – the other one is the City Centre AQMA (which includes parts of Jesmond). Nitrogen dioxide levels in the City Centre AQMA are even higher than in Gosforth and also rose following Black Friday.

Levels in both the City Centre and the South Gosforth AQMAs reduced during 2017, but remain at concerning levels.

Nitrogen dioxide is not the only air pollutant that threatens public health. In 2015, SPACE for Gosforth arranged monitoring of particulates on Gosforth High Street and we were concerned to find that during our monitoring session levels were higher that the WHO recommended limit and at times exceeded the lower EU limit for safe levels.

The air pollution bear monitoring particulates on Gosforth High Street

Our concern about air pollution is shared by a number of hospital trusts (including Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital) and councils who are supporters of UK Clean Air Day.  Other supporters include leading medical organisations and charities including Public Health England, King’s College London, the British Medical Association, the Royal College of Physicians, the BMJ (formerly British Medical Journal), the Royal College of Anaesthetists, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, the Royal Society of Medicine, the Royal College of General Practitioners, the Royal College of Nursing, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the British Lung Foundation and the British Heart Foundation.

Clean Air Day is co-ordinated by environmental change charity, Global Action Plan.

Chris Large, partner at Global Action Plan said: “We know that people do want to act on air pollution. But currently, they don’t know how to protect themselves and their children, or how to cut air pollution in their local area. 15th June will be a day of practical action, myth-busting and awareness-raising, so we can all breathe cleaner air.”

Top tips to cut air pollution:

• switch off your car engine whenever you can,
• leave the car at home if you really don’t need to use it,
• walk or cycle with your children to school,
• share information on cutting air pollution with others.

Click here to download the Clean Air Day leaflet.

The post No idling – make every day a cleaner air day appeared first on SPACE for Gosforth.