Floating bus stops
Overview
- Regulatory Context: New DfT statutory guidance (Jan 2026) mandates 3m wide islands. Further research from Active Travel England (ATE) is expected to be finalised in 2027.
- Key Consensus:
- Speakers agreed on the necessity to “design out” FBS by widening road space and reducing motor traffic volume rather than piecemeal guidance.
- Need for a holistic street vision over target-driven safety strategies.
- A clearer road hierarchy in the upcoming 2027 guidance, prioritising pedestrians and cyclists.
- Legislative Focus: Discussions centred on the Bus Services [No.2] Bill and the Bus Services Act 2025.
Speaker Presentations
Mark Philpott – Founder of City Infinity, Civil Engineer
- Vision over Guidance: Argued against specific statutory guidance for single street elements. Submitted evidence to the Bus Services [No.2] Bill committee advocating for a “vision for streets” instead.
- The Dutch Model: Recommended adopting Dutch Sustainable Safety (3rd Edition, 2018–2030) to reduce the need for FBS.
- Infrastructure Realities: Acknowledged that while LTNs allow for easier cycling integration, cycle tracks (and thus FBS) become inevitable where bus and cycle routes coincide.
- Systemic Issues: Noted that side road junctions are a larger safety threat than FBS, a direct result of lacking a national street design vision.
Chris Theobald – Guide Dogs, Senior Policy & Campaigns Manager
- Inaccessibility: Stated that FBS, including backless floating borders, remove the autonomy of vision-impaired individuals to navigate safely.
- Research Findings: Produced the Designing for Inclusion report (UCL), which found that all FBS forms are perceived as unsafe, leading disabled users to avoid active travel environments.
- Policy Recommendations: Proposed 15 recommendations, including a pause on FBS design and shared bus stop borders (where no delineation exists).
- Guidance Conflicts: Highlighted contradictions between the Bus Services Act 2025 and British Standards Institution (2018) guidance, which states users should not have to cross cycle tracks.
- Missing Education: Emphasised the need for DfT-led education for cyclists, particularly regarding the rise of cycle hire schemes.
Kate Ball – Campaigns and Policy Lead, Wheels for Wellbeing
- Pan-Impaired Accessibility: Every user group shares similar needs: adequate width, turning circles, and clear sight lines.
- Technical Failures: Pointed out that current guidance often ignores drainage, leading to puddles on cycle tracks instead of functional bypasses.
- Width: Criticised the 3.5m minimum width guidance; it is often too wide for the available space, forcing designers to narrow footways and create problematic environments.
- Legislative Gaps: Called for mobility aid vehicles (e.g. power chairs) to be legally recognised as legitimate cycle lane users, similar to e-scooters.
Q&A
- Retrofitting: Responding to concerns about the UK being unable to be retrofitted like the Netherlands (Richard), Mark highlighted that the Netherlands still has narrow historic streets
- Olly highlighted that the NL decentres motorists and enforces 20mph limits; the UK can emulate this.
- Safety vs. Comfort: Dom Smith asked Chris to expand upon the conflation of safety with comfort.
- Chris discussed how recent guidance conflates “comfort” with “safety”
- He highlighted the shorter, inadequate consultation process for accessibility organisations regarding FBS guidance.
- Technical Limitations: Ali Atai noted that guidance assumes all roads are flat, failing to address the high speeds of cyclists on hilly or downhill terrain.
- “False Dichotomy” of cyclists and disabled pedestrians: Dom Smith argued that pitting “cyclists” against “disabled bus users” is a distraction that ultimately prioritises motorists over the most vulnerable road users.
- Chris stated that he is not interested in pitching cyclists against disabled pedestrians, but highlighted that buses are the only form of transport likely to be used by all abilities.
- Accessibility Hierarchy: While FBS are a major issue, Simon and Chris noted that pavement parking and side road junctions remain a more frequent daily barrier for many, depending on their geographic location.