REPORT INTO THE REASONS FOR GRIDLOCK OCCURRING IN THE VICINITY OF NORTHAMPTON BUS
INTERCHANGE ON 3rd MARCH 2014
1. This report has been requested and its purpose is to explain how it came to be that gridlock
occurred around the Interchange on the first weekday of operation, Monday the 3rd March
2014.
2. It was always expected that with operational experience the Interchange would need works
to be undertaken in light of that experience. Separately to this report, officers of the
Borough Council and the County Council, led by Mr Boyes (Director of Regeneration,
Enterprise and Planning at NBC) and Mr Farquhar (Head of Highways at NCC) is working on
these matters and are developing and implementing a programme of works to address that
operational experience.
Monday, 3rd March 2014
3. Northgate Bus Interchange was opened formally on Saturday, 1st March 2014. This Opening
was followed by a public Open Day which was very well attended. Information about where
buses would stop and how the Bus Interchange would work was provided to the public and
there were staff available from the Borough Council and from Stagecoach to assist in
answering public questions. This high level of public information presence and general staff
presence was maintained throughout the following initial weeks of operation.
4. The first operational day for the Interchange was Sunday, 2nd March 2014. The intention of
having Sunday as the first day was that systems and operating procedures could be tested in
a less busy environment. No significant problems were reported on that day and the
Interchange flowed smoothly.
5. On Monday, 3rd March 2014, the Interchange managed the peak of bus traffic in the morning
rush hour well, and no significant problems were reported. The public were able to arrive
and leave by bus smoothly and by the deployment of additional staffing, particularly on
public information duties, everything was done to assist the public in getting to the right
stops for the buses they needed to access. Minor issues that arose primarily related to
customers getting to know where their stop was or similar matters.
6. Shortly after 11am problems began to arise with the flow of buses out of and around the
Interchange. By 11.30am the flow of buses out of the Interchange had ceased almost
completely. Within a very short period, the flow into the bus station had halted and traffic
was unable to go through from Sheep Street to Greyfriars, from Bradshaw Street into Sheep
Street, and from the Drapery into Sheep Street. Flow into and out of the Interchange was
completely blocked.
7. These blockages led to further traffic problems as buses queued further back along their
routes and mixed with other traffic. The consequence was to create a gridlock situation with
much greater impact that simply in the area around the Interchange.
8. The consequences of this gridlock were significant in the hours that followed. Passengers
were disembarked in different locations. For example, buses queuing on Greyfriars were
authorised to disembark on Greyfriars. Buses were sent away from the Interchange area by
Stagecoach in order to improve circulation by taking buses out of the immediate area.
Timetables were impossible to adhere to. Undoubtedly many members of the public were
inconvenienced both on public transport and in private vehicles in many different ways but
particularly due to lengthy delays.
9. The situation was responded to on the ground by the Borough Council, Northamptonshire
Police, the County Council and Stagecoach (the largest bus operator). Northamptonshire
Police deployed their helicopter to monitor the overall position and Northamptonshire
County Council Highways did likewise from CCTV. A tactical (‘silver’) meeting was held at
Police HQ and supported by all relevant agencies. The Borough Council called a further joint
agency meeting to be held that evening at the Guildhall.
10. The gridlock was brought to an end by a number of measures and factors.
a. Steps were taken to enable buses to disembark elsewhere as mentioned above
b. Police and Stagecoach personnel directed buses to leave gaps that began to enable
flow through the system once again
c. Police directed non-bus traffic similarly
d. Private vehicles, hearing of the gridlock and also listening to media coverage, began
to avoid the area
e. Buses were effectively taken out of circulation to reduce the volume of traffic trying
to enter the area.
f.
Police and Stagecoach staff were deployed to direct traffic/buses in and out of the
Interchange
g. College Street was blocked by the Police to traffic, as was Kingswell Street, which
reduced the volume of private vehicles entering the area.
11. The initial gridlock began to be freed up around the Interchange between 2pm and 3pm.
However the consequences were widely felt for several hours. Timetables did not return to
normal until after the evening rush hour.
Causes of the Gridlock
12. In the initial flurry of action on the day, many ideas were posited as to what might have
contributed to this gridlock. Matters mentioned included
a. The impact of traffic coming up College Street and King Street on the free-flow of
buses out of the Interchange
b. the volume of traffic around the bus station,
c. people (drivers/pedestrians/passengers) getting used to the new traffic and public
transport arrangements
d. the performance of the traffic lights at the junction between Bradshaw Street and
Sheep Street,
e. loading by vehicles on the Drapery and Sheep Street,
f.
inappropriate driver behaviour, including failure to comply with traffic regulations in
force around the Drapery, Bradshaw Street and Sheep Street,
g. pedestrian behaviour,
h. alignment of bus shelters, and
i.
the effect of pedestrian crossing arrangements on the Drapery, Sheep Street and
Bradshaw Street on bus movements.
13. At the multi-agency meeting on the evening of the 3rd March, a full discussion was held with
everyone’s observations of what had caused the problem aired and debated. The County
Council, as Highways Authority, put forward their analysis of the position based on their
professional judgement and it was that analysis which formed the basis of the immediate
response.
14. With the passage of time and on the basis of experience as to what resolved the issue the
following day, it is now evident that the major reason that gridlock occurred was the road
layout design on Bradshaw Street at its junction with College Street and King Street.
15. The road layout on Bradshaw Street included a mini-roundabout at the exit from the
Interchange. This required buses to Give Way to traffic coming up College Street, or from
King Street / the Park Inn, or doing a U-Turn coming East along Bradshaw Street, a
manoeuvre particularly relevant to Private Hire Vehicles or private vehicles dropping off at
the Interchange.
16. During the morning rush hour, this had not caused a problem as there was not much traffic
along College Street or out of King Street / the Park Inn. However this increased significantly
in the mid-morning. At this point, traffic which took precedence over buses was clogging up
Bradshaw Street to the point where buses coming out of the Interchange could not move
out on to Bradshaw Street easily at all.
17. As exit from the Interchange began to block, this led to queuing within the Interchange. At a
point shortly afterwards it became difficult for buses to enter the Interchange at all. This led
to queuing up Greyfriars which then blocked the exits from Sheep Street meaning that traffic
coming up the Drapery or out of Bradshaw Street could not do so.
18. It was agreed at the multi-agency meeting on the evening of the 3rd March that, at their
proposal, the County Council would overnight eradicate the mini-roundabout as the top
priority for action. The new layout to be implemented overnight had been designed prior to
that meeting by the County Council. This layout gave priority to buses leaving the
Interchange over traffic leaving College Street or King Street / the Park Inn.
19. It was further agreed that that steps would be taken to stop traffic sitting in the middle of
junctions where Bradshaw Street meets Sheep Street and the Drapery, and where Sheep
Street meets Greyfriars by the introduction of box junction yellow hatching. This addressed
the issue of traffic blocking exits from Bradshaw Street and the Drapery into Sheep Street in
particular and provided a better control over traffic not complying with Traffic Regulation
Orders.
20. In light of the above non-compliance and recognising that there had been a higher level of
issues with both vehicle and pedestrian traffic on the Monday than had been anticipated it
was also asked that there was an increased Police presence on the Tuesday to assist with
managing those factors.
Tuesday, 4th March 2014
21. The County Council deployed a team overnight to do as much of this priority works as was
possible before morning traffic and buses would need access to this area. By Tuesday
morning, the mini-roundabout had been removed and the new layout put in place. Yellow
hatching was in place in front of the Interchange where Bradshaw Street meets the Drapery
and Sheep Street. Hatching had not then been installed on Greyfriars and these plans were
subsequently refined to “Keep Clear” signage implemented later in the week.
22. Additional measures were taken, including barriers to direct pedestrians across the Pelican
crossings, police traffic enforcement, PCSO control of flows across the zebra crossings, and
new instructions by Stagecoach to their drivers on the revised arrangements. Minor
adjustments were made to the sequencing of the traffic lights at Bradshaw Street/Sheep
Street/the Drapery. There was a much higher management presence from all agencies than
on the Monday so that issues could be micro-managed as they arose.
23. The Interchange did not become gridlocked for a second day. Timetables were implemented
and media coverage confirmed that the town’s public transport system was operating within
normal parameters. College Street remained open to traffic.
24. Further observations of how well the new arrangements fared were shared at a further
multi-agency meeting and further works to control traffic flow were carried out overnight.
These included changes to traffic controls on the Drapery and on Sheep Street to reduce the
volume of traffic using the area at key times.
Subsequently
25. Further multi-agency meetings have been held and tight monitoring and management of the
Interchange has been in place throughout. Further minor changes were made during the
first week, and officers of the Borough Council and the County Council have worked on and
implemented further refinements based on the operational experience to date. Whilst these
may have an impact of some of the minor issues identified on the Monday 3rd March, they
were not all at the core of the reasons for gridlock happening.
26. Discussions are taking place about reducing the amount of traffic using the King Street (Park
Inn)/College Street/Bradshaw Street junction over the medium term, and proposals will be
formulated to achieve this.
27. Improvements to help pedestrians move around and between the Interchange and on-street
bus stops are being implemented and are being kept under review. This includes the
removal of one zebra crossing and the installation of a Pelican crossing on the Drapery.
28. As mentioned above, these are the subject of joint working between officers of the County
Council and the Borough Council.
Project Background
29. The Interchange Project came about as part of the Borough Council’s agreement with Legal
and General. This agreement requires the Council, as a Condition Precedent, to relocate bus
services and bus layover facilities from Greyfriars.
30. Extensive analysis was carried out in 2010 and 2011 into alternative locations and the
selection of the Fishmarket site was supported by the Borough Council and the County
Council in 2011. This was due to:
a. access and location within the town
b. alignment with town centre development strategy
c. availability of the site and avoidance of temporary solutions, and
d. the reduced stand numbers could be supported by on-street provision
31. Design work was carried out by the County Council and their agents, working with a multiagency project team including the Borough Council.
32. The necessary planning application was made in April 2012 on behalf of the joint project
team by the County Council. This was considered by the Planning Committee in July 2012
and was approved with Conditions, and Conservation Area Consent was referred nationally.
33. Conservation Area Consent was given by the National Planning Casework Unit in August
2012.
34. The delivery of the development was managed through the Borough Council and was
contracted to Kier. The Interchange was completed to the required design in time for its
opening in March 2014.
Mini-Roundabout on Bradshaw Street
35. MGWSP produced the “Northampton Bus Interchange – Appraisal Report” for
Northamptonshire Highways in June 2011. This report considered the options for different
locations of the Interchange and was not a site design document.
36. However, attached to this report were a series of plans including a “Conceptual Option” for
the Interchange to be built on the Fishmarket Site using land in NBC ownership. This plan is
not identical to the built Interchange but is close. This plan showed no mini-roundabout but
instead showed Give Way lines where College Street and also King Street meet Bradshaw
Street. No particular significance was given to this feature of the conceptual design in the
report and it was not the basis of the evaluation of options.
37. Once the site had been selected, design work was then carried out under the project team’s
guidance to produce a planning application. The design work was conducted by the County
Council and the County Council made the Application, but it should be emphasised that this
was on behalf of the project team as a whole.
38. The Site Plan included with the Planning Application in April 2012 for the Interchange shows
the mini-roundabout. This was approved by Planning Committee on officer advice and the
Conditions on the Permission include that the mini-roundabout must be in place before the
Interchange comes into use. Therefore this element of the design was a feature of the
design supported by the Project Team.
39. During the project, the layout of the Interchange and the road access, including the miniroundabout, was mocked up on the Claret Car Park and buses were driven in and out of this
layout to review how it worked in practice. This led to some amendments to the detail of the
design, including widening the splay around the exit at the mini-roundabout. However it was
not spotted at that time by anyone involved that this layout could lead to gridlock.
40. The works were carried out by Kier under contract to the Borough Council and the Borough
Council exercised the responsibility for highways improvement works under an Agreement
pursuant to Sections 38 and 278 of the Highways Act 1980, including in implementing the
designed mini-roundabout. If any changes of a material nature were wanted by the Borough
Council then under this Agreement the consent of the County Council Engineer was
required. There were some changes to the design between Planning and implementation,
particularly in relation to pedestrian crossings outside the main entrance, and it is
understood that all these changes were agreed either as part of agreeing the Agreement or
subsequently. As with all major projects with timescales to meet, there was a degree of
time pressure on all involved to ensure that the project was delivered on time.
41. The mini-roundabout was installed and, as above, removed overnight on the first weekday
of operation.
Other matters
42. As mentioned earlier, there were other factors that it is considered played a small part but
which did not of themselves create gridlock on the day. Again, in so far as they relate to
highway improvement works, they were equally covered by the Agreement under s38 and
s278 of the Highways Act.
Costs
43. The costs associated with the highway improvement works needed overnight during the
week commencing the 2nd March 2014 were approximately £15,000. Further adjustments
are being made around North Gate Bus Station based on the wider operational experience
of the bus station, which are incurring further costs to be reported once works are
completed. These do not however directly relate to the gridlock which occurred on the 2nd
March 2014.
Conclusions
Events on the day and subsequently
44. The gridlock which took place on Monday the 2nd March 2014 is deeply regretted. Public
apologies for this have already been given but are readily repeated.
45. Prompt action by the County Council to remove the mini-roundabout and implement other
immediate highway works was taken and proved to be effective. The ability of the County
Council to find a solution rapidly and implement it immediately ensured the situation did not
become prolonged by occurring on the next day.
46. The support of the Police and all agencies involved in enforcing traffic rules on the Tuesday
in particular but also in days that followed was also important to things running smoothly
thereafter. Compliance with traffic regulation orders around the Bus Interchange is now
within usual norms, but equally these orders are part of ongoing work referred to above.
47. Emergency response arrangements also worked well on the day and on subsequent days.
There was good and positive engagement from all public agencies and from Stagecoach.
48. The opening and implementation arrangements for the Interchange otherwise worked well.
The considerable efforts of all partners to ensure that was the case and to respond to the
problems were appreciated.
49. There has been no repetition of the circumstances of the morning of Monday, 3rd March
subsequently and after nearly two months, the Bus Station has operated within acceptable
parameters.
Design and Implementation Process
50. All partners had a role in the design, development and implementation of the Interchange.
The greatest responsibility of course rests with the Borough Council as the project leaders
and the County Council in their role as Highways Authority and designers.
51. The project was designed over three years ago. The designs were seen by the relevant
professionals and partners over that period from all organisations involved. None of these
professionals recognised the potential or actual risk posed by the mini-roundabout. Given
this extensive spread of involvement no one individual or organisation can be simply held
responsible for this oversight.
52. Whilst the design which was implemented is very much as agreed at Planning Committee,
there were some changes, mainly revised pedestrian crossing arrangements outside the
main entrance to the Bus Station. An issue therefore is of course the checking/change
controls as the project moved away from the original design, even though these design
changes were not of themselves the cause of the gridlock.
53. Whilst this is the case, there are clearly points that must be taken up by both Councils and in
particular the Borough Council when it is leading a project. These are:
a. Consideration needs to be given in all projects as to how to encourage critical
evaluation of proposals to seek to minimise the instances of ‘built-in’ problems such
as occurred here.
b. Partners in all projects need to be open to questioning and challenge with project
teams and, whilst supporting professionalism and professional lead roles, there
needs to be a willingness amongst all partners to ask even the most basic questions.
c. Consideration needs to be given to tightening change control procedures within
project teams to ensure that changes to design are fully evaluated and do not cause
any unintended consequences.
d. Time pressures within projects of this nature need be managed through careful
planning, good effective governance arrangements that engage all partners in a
structured manner.
e. The points drawn from this evaluation are to be incorporated into project
development and implementation training / CPD for all staff involved in
regeneration projects or other significant buildings projects to be implemented
either separately or jointly by the two Councils.
54. It is further considered that the two Councils need to establish better joint arrangements for
managing the impact of programmed work on traffic flows in the Town Centre. Over the
next few years, as the regeneration of the Town gathers pace, there will be continued issues
of ensuring that changes have the best possible impact on traffic flows. To that end regular
meetings have been established between the Director of Regeneration Enterprise and
Planning at NBC and the Head of Highways at NCC plus relevant project officers to ensure
that co-ordination takes place and issues are forward planned and managed to the utmost
effectiveness.
David Kennedy, Chief Executive, Northampton Borough Council, April 2014
Paul Blantern, Chief Executive, Northamptonshire County Council, April 2014