North Tyneside Council has launched a review of all bus stop bypasses, “a design which helps reduce conflict where cycle routes interact with public transport bus stops”, following concerns raised by the design of the bus stop and cycle path on Grand Parade. The review has been expanded to “include other bus stops only accessible through crossing a highway”.
The council is seeking views “to understand what works, what doesn’t and what could be improved”, to be “incorporated into a report and used to make informed decisions regarding future infrastructure projects”. All comments should be emailed to Gary.Walker@capita.com by Wednesday 6 November.
Since publishing this blog, we’ve been reminded about this helpful guide, Thinking about bus stop bypasses, produced by Wheels for Wellbeing (an organisation that works to enhance disabled people’s access to cycling).
This graphic identifies the key points to be thought about to ensure that cycling infrastructure is inclusive and accessible, and works for cyclists and for pedestrians, including disabled cyclists and pedestrians.
Our response as Street Life North Tyneside is as follows:
When carefully designed, bus stop bypasses can help reduce the number of collisions and injuries by ensuring cyclists are not forced to pull into free-flowing motor traffic to avoid stopping buses.
The pattern of collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles on carriageways and around bus stops makes it impossible not to use bus stop bypasses.
As Living Streets concludes, “If levels of cycling are to be significantly increased, and this is to become an ordinary, inclusive means of transport, then entirely ruling out the use of bus stop bypasses is not a viable option.”
When bus stops are designed carefully, cyclists who are more wary of sharing the road with motor vehicles are more likely to cycle, including women, children, older people, and disabled people.
When well-designed, the risk of conflict between cyclists and pedestrians is generally low. Again, as Living Streets suggest, “whilst there is some concern about bus stop bypasses, our observational data suggested the level of discomfort or difficulty most people experience in using these bus stops, when well designed, is very low.”
Transport for London concluded, in their review of bus stop bypasses, “that the risk of pedestrians being injured at bus stop bypasses is very low. There were five pedestrian casualties involving cyclists and one involving an e-scooter rider on bus stop bypasses over a three-year period [across the whole of London]. To put this in context, 11,400 pedestrians were injured in collisions with motor vehicle drivers over the same timeframe.”
Design features like zebra crossing points, raised crossing points, and tactile paving can help ensure both cyclists and bus users know what to do. Most problems arise when there isn’t enough space for the bus stop, cycle track, and pavement.
Most of the concerns that do arise can, and should, be dealt with through very careful design; there is an increasing amount of good, clear guidance available, produced by organisations such as Transport for London and Living Streets.
Turning specifically to North Tyneside
Conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists are much more likely to be an issue as a result of the overuse of ‘shared paths’, including at bus stops. In general, the reliance on shared paths across the borough forces pedestrians and cyclists into possible conflict; the council could commit to ensuring shared paths do not feature in any future cycle path plans. In terms of bus stops located on shared paths, there are numerous examples of this conflictual design (e.g. along the Coast Road, around Cobalt). Better design solutions in these situations would reduce potential conflict and injury across North Tyneside’s developing cycling network.
While there is also no evidence that cars on service roads pose a significant risk to bus users, equally careful design would logically be applied in the instances that these exist in North Tyneside. Numerous such cases do exist, for example, along The Broadway, including at the junction of Ealing Drive, where bus passengers must cross a wide T-junction to access the bus stop. It would be good to see moves to improve traffic calming and crossing measures in these locations, including ensuring there are dropped kerbs, to improve the accessibility and safety of these bus stops
Many of the wider concerns expressed about bus stop bypasses arise in busy city centre locations, which are not applicable in North Tyneside, where generally both footfall and cycle traffic are lower.
Our experiences of the new floating bus stop on Grand Parade are largely very positive, as cyclists and pedestrians. The design functions as it should, keeping both cyclists and pedestrians safe. Visibility of the crossings is generally good coming from both directions with plenty of time for cyclists to see any pedestrians that may be crossing, and vice versa.
The current set-up enables cycle traffic to be safely segregated from motor traffic, and in this case, crucially buses which would otherwise introduce a dangerous conflict here.
We do, however, have a few concerns here:
- the placement of the bus stop in relation to the crossing, meaning that for northbound cyclists, bus passengers may appear from behind the bus stop with little prior visibility or warning;
- the absence of a raised table at the crossing closest to the bus stop, resulting in pedestrians sometimes choosing to use the larger, raised table crossing to the south and accessing the bus stop via the island;
- the location of a busy loading bay to the south of the bus stop, which reduces visibility for pedestrians and for cyclists travelling north – our experience is that this introduces a greater risk of collision than the design of the bypass itself.
If this bus stop bypass were to be removed, it would undoubtedly increase the number of cyclists who may choose to ride on the footpath, due to the perceived danger of riding in the road with motor traffic, and therefore create more potential conflict between those cycling and walking. In this particular location, it would also introduce conflict with customers entering and leaving the commercial premises just south of the bus stop.
If North Tyneside Council is to continue to extend its cycling network to provide safe infrastructure for cyclists, and for pedestrians, then it must continue to use bus stop bypasses, but must also ensure that – as with every aspect of its new cycling infrastructure – all schemes are built to the highest standards.