Home | Press | Publications | What We Do | Who We Are | Search | Site Map | Contacts | Links
Publications

Publications A to Z

< Previous | Contents | Next >

Cycling by Design

3. planning for the cyclist

Principles

3.1 This Chapter of Cycling by Design provides a general introduction to cycle network development. Key criteria are identified and used as a base from which an adaptable method of network planning, incorporating an identifiable route hierarchy, is put forward.

Application

3.2 It is intended that application of the principles put forward within this document will enable a consistent level of cycling infrastructure to be developed. The prime target for the cyclist is a route that is "suitable for cycling". Therefore provided that it is safe, convenient and pleasant to use, a route may be developed from either reallocating space to the cyclist within the existing road network or through construction of new facilities. Careful design at junctions, treatment of major roads, signed routes along traffic calmed or minor roads and cycle tracks all have a part to play.

3.3 As the bicycle is legally defined as a vehicle the cyclist has the same right to use the public road system as any other user and due to its comprehensive nature, the existing road network should be viewed as the backbone of any future cycling infrastructure.

3.4 Although the majority of cyclists would normally choose to avoid travelling on heavily trafficked roads (and this should be recognised in implementing facilities) for many urban and inter-urban trips there may be no feasible alternative. It should be noted that those authorities that are currently making most progress in relation to providing for the cyclist are realising that satisfactory treatment of major roads is often an essential part of creating successful cycling infrastructure.

3.5 on the assumption that there is little prospect of constructing a totally separate cycle network that is comprehensive, direct, convenient and avoids all existing roads, cycle planning must start from the premise that, whatever special facilities may be provided, redevelopment of the existing infrastructure and provision of cycle facilities within future road improvements should be a prime objective.

3.6 Although the road network may be made more convenient and safer to use through the application of the principles presented within this document, the implementation of engineering measures alone is unlikely to have a significant impact on the overall growth of cycling. Cycling by Design should therefore be used in conjunction with a programme of education, enforcement and encouragement in accordance with the guidelines presented in the National Cycling Strategy.

Approach

3.7 European research (CROW; The Centre for Research and Contract Standardisation in Civil and Traffic Engineering) has identified cyclists’ five main cycling infrastructure objectives. These are:

(i) Coherence: Cycling infrastructure should form a coherent unit which links origins and destinations. Routes should be continuous and be of a consistent standard.

(ii) Directness: Routes should be as direct as possible and be based on known or modelled desire lines. Detours and delays will deter use.

(iii) Attractiveness: The perception of a route is important, particularly if it is to attract new users. The designer should take into account the total experience of the cyclist on the journey. Attention should be paid to the environmental quality of the route combined with appropriate engineering detail. A route should complement and, where possible, enhance the area through which it passes. Appropriate treatment of sensitive issues such as lighting, personal safety, aesthetics and noise should be fundamental considerations.

(iv) Safety: Design should minimise actual and perceived risk for cyclists/road users. It is important to avoid ambiguity in design.

(v) Comfort: Cyclists prefer smooth, well-maintained surfaces, regular sweeping and gentle gradients. Routes should be convenient to use and avoid complicated manoeuvres.

3.8 Delivery of these objectives should be enhanced by adoption of the general hierarchy of measures now outlined.

Hierarchy of Measures

3.9 Currently there is no single correct method for developing suitable cycling infrastructure. Much remains dependent on the effective integration of cyclists’ needs into the broader traffic, environmental and planning objectives set by the relevant Authority. It should be recognised however that cycle friendly measures will be more easily funded and implemented if they directly benefit the wider community and not solely the cyclist. Strategies that emphasise safety in terms of traffic restraint and speed reduction and the promotion of health and sustainability are areas which may aid the development of cycling.

3.10 On the assumption that the existing and future road network should form the basis for cycle infrastructure the following hierarchy of measures is proposed as a first stage in identifying the way forward. This hierarchy is based on information provided by the Cyclists’ Touring Club and the Institution of Highways and Transportation document Cycle Friendly Infrastructure.

3.11 The hierarchy advocates, wherever possible, measures to make existing roads safe and convenient for cyclists, in preference to segregation.

(i) Traffic Reduction: Can traffic volumes and/or speeds be reduced to an acceptable level to enable cyclists to be safely accommodated within the existing road network? Can heavy goods traffic be restricted or diverted?

(ii) Traffic Calming: Can vehicle speeds and driver behaviour be modified by the introduction of traffic calming to enable the cyclist to be accommodated within the road network?

(iii) Junction Treatment and Traffic Management: Can specific junction treatments or other traffic management measures solve the problems that cyclists currently encounter, particularly at accident locations?

(iv) Re-allocation of Carriageway Space: Can carriageway space be re-allocated to give more space to cyclists?

(v) Cycle Lanes and Cycle Tracks: Having considered and implemented, where feasible, the measures identified above what additional cycle provisions, such as cycle lanes and tracks, remain necessary?

Application of the Measures

3.12 In some instances these measures may be complementary and application of the principles identified further up the hierarchy may make it easier to implement successfully those suggested at the lower level, or may actually render them unnecessary. The development of a consistent level of cycling infrastructure is likely to incorporate the application of one or more of these measures.

The Need for Balance

3.13 The effect on other road users must always be borne in mind. It is important to ensure that, while re-allocation of road space may prove to be beneficial to the cyclist, it may cause difficulties to other road users which ultimately could lead to conflicts and safety problems.

3.14 In common with other infrastructure provision, the need for a balanced approach is critical. The needs and aspirations of a variety of groups, of which cycling is one, must be fully assessed and considered before arriving at a solution.

Route Hierarchy

3.15 Provision of cycling infrastructure should relate to the status of the cycling route within an overall network hierarchy.

3.16 It is considered appropriate to categorise cycling facilities into three discreet levels as follows:

(i) Long Distance Routes: Routes of an inter-urban nature and therefore of the highest standard. These should aim to carry approximately 70% of the network’s total cycle volume. All classes of user should be accommodated. All National Cycle Network routes should be classed as Long Distance and be treated accordingly.

(ii) Commuter Routes: General routes which are designed to aid the distribution of cyclists throughout the urban area and link Long Distance Routes to Local Access Routes. Although all classes of user may be expected, the majority are likely to be commuters.

(iii) Local Access Routes: Generally local neighbourhood routes which mainly make use of minor local roads. Although of a lower geometric standard, they are likely to be vital to the overall success of the proposed cycle network providing links to local schools and shops.

3.17 For smaller areas, a two-tier hierarchy involving only Long Distance and Local Access Routes may be more appropriate.

Network Planning

3.18 In order to plan in a rational and comprehensive manner for travel by bicycle, and integrate it with other transport and planning developments, it is important to develop the hierarchy of measures and requirements into a framework for network planning. It should be emphasised that the term "network planning" is not intended to imply that cyclists should be restricted to a limited set of identified routes but rather that it is a tool to help set priorities and ensure continuity of cycling infrastructure provision. A 6 step process should be followed.

3.19 Step 1 : Quantify Demand:

3.20 The first step in developing a network plan should involve the assessment of existing and latent cycling demand. This information may be available from various sources:-

3.21 Census Data: The Census of Population provides comprehensive transport to work data which identifies the cyclist.

3.22 Cycle trips may be analysed by origin and destination, zoned as enumeration districts, wards or postcode sectors. Interpretation of data identifying short trips (say less than 3 miles) by other forms of transport may be used as a reasonable basis to assist in the identification of latent demand.

3.23 Care should be taken in the assessment of census records, as the level of data is too coarse to provide detailed information on local traffic patterns. For local proposals, census data should only be used as an initial indicator of cycle flows and as a guide to areas where further surveys may be necessary.

3.24 Existing Traffic Counts: Existing records of classified traffic counts may provide historical cycle flow information. However, local knowledge may often contradict the counts and the results should therefore be treated with caution as the survey may have failed to record all cycle movements.

3.25 Specific Surveys: The most efficient and effective way to obtain current data on existing and potential cycle flows is usually to carry out site specific surveys. Depending on the size of the area under review this may involve a number of local surveys rather than a single large one. The surveys should not just be aimed at counting the number of cyclists but should also involve home interview questionnaires (developed specifically for each individual survey) that are distributed to cyclists for return by post. As a minimum, questionnaires should generally aim to identify the following:-

(i) Trip Origin and Destination (including intermediate trips);

(ii) Journey Purpose/frequency;

(iii) Route(s) Taken;

(iv) Route Problems;

(v) Desire Lines and Barriers;

(vi) Possible Improvements;

(vii) Sex and Age;

(viii) Alternative Mode;

(ix) Comments and Views.

3.26 The questionnaires should be structured to provide information on latent demand as well as existing cycle usage.

3.27 The effects of weather on cycling can be marked and a count over a representative 12 hour day may need to be extended to cover a 3 day period, or to the morning and afternoon peaks of 2 additional days if a high proportion of daily cycle flows occur at the peaks. Peak periods for cycle flows typically cover 0700-0900 and 1500-1800.

3.28 Surveys should also identify and record any (illegal) riding on footways and footpaths.

3.29 The types of cyclist recorded should be divided into separate identifiable sets in order that, where appropriate, the representative ‘design cyclist’ may be identified. It is recommended that the following subsets should be used as they complement the hierarchy described in Paragraph 3.16:-

(i) Touring/sports cyclists, often travelling in excess of 30kph, and prepared to claim their road space. (Minimum standard: Long Distance Routes).

(ii) Commuters confident in traffic, valuing speed and directness. (Minimum standard: Commuter Routes).

(iii) Vulnerable groups (children, family), inexperienced adult cyclists and elderly people. (Minimum standard: Local Access Routes).

3.30 Information gathered from surveys may be further supplemented by consultations with local schools, interested parties and doorstep surveys in order to build up a comprehensive picture. An example questionnaire is included at Appendix 5.

3.31 Modelling Demand: Although specific computer models are currently being developed in line with the QUOVADIS-Bicycle model used in the Netherlands, they are not yet well advanced in this country and, unless levels of cycle use are particularly high (>5% of general traffic) they may not prove economic for general use. Until further progress is made it is suggested that the majority of designers should continue to model demand through desktop study methods and the application of an origin-destination matrix consistent with current transportation modelling and forecasting techniques.

3.32 Demand Mapping: Based on the information collated from the methods identified above, a map can be developed which identifies existing routes and their level of use. This should be based on cycle flows (existing and latent), not proposals, and will include major roads. Significant cycle trip generators such as universities, colleges, halls of residence and schools should also be identified and shown. This will enable the needs of the cyclist to be identified and incorporated at the outset into potential land-use or transport changes, particularly traffic management or traffic calming measures.

3.33 Step 2 : Identify Accident Zones:

3.34 Accident data (from Stats 19 records) for the preceding 3 years or more will highlight current accident locations. If plotted out they may also help identify existing routes used by cyclists. Roads and Planning Authorities, combined with hospital A&E surveys may be able to provide additional information on injury accidents that occur both on and off the public road network. This information will supplement the Stats 19 data which can produce low accident rates due to under-reporting. Complaints of "near misses" and perceived danger should also be recorded.

3.35 Step 3 : Quantify Traffic Flows:

3.36 A classified traffic count of average weekday 12-hour (7am to 7pm) vehicle flows should be undertaken in conjunction with the proposed cycle surveys. Confirmation of the percentage HGV content should enable a clearer picture of the existing volume of traffic flow and therefore, the road’s potential for inclusion within a cycle network to be assessed (Refer to Chapter 5).

3.37 Step 4 : Opportunities & Constraints:

3.38 Having made an assessment of the existing and latent demand for cycling within the area, identified accident zones and quantified traffic flows, the next step should be to identify the opportunities and constraints likely to influence the development of a cycle network. The existing road network should be used as a base plan onto which the opportunities and constraints should be added. (This information may be assessed through Geographic Information Systems).

3.39 Opportunities: Any existing cycle facilities should be highlighted. For example:-

(i) Cycle parking;

(ii) Off road cycle routes;

(iii) Bus lanes;

(iv) Traffic calmed areas;

(v) Speed restricted zones, and

(vi) Pedestrianised areas (Where cyclists are exempt from the general ban on vehicles. Refer to Chapter 8).

3.40 Planning and transport opportunities such as future developments and traffic management schemes (which provide opportunities for cycling to be incorporated at an early stage in the relevant planning process) should be added to the base plan. Physical opportunities for routes should also be identified. These may include:-

(i) Quiet residential streets;

(ii) Disused railway lines;

(iii) Routes through parks, and

(iv) Footpaths (Where adequate space allows. Refer to Chapter 8).

3.41 Constraints: Set against the opportunities listed above must be the potential constraints to any future cycle network. Any constraints identified should be added to the base plan, for example:-

(i) Cyclist accident sites;

(ii) Speed limits > 30mph in urban areas;

(iii) Speed limits > 50mph in rural areas;

(iv) One-way streets;

(v) High traffic flows, and

(vi) High HGV content (>15%).

3.42 Although these elements may initially be identified as constraints to the development of a cycle network some or all may be overcome through the application of design techniques.

3.43 Step 5 : Proposal Map:

3.44 Having identified the demand for cycling and the potential opportunities and constraints, the next step is to develop a proposal map which takes these factors into account within the context of the relevant policy framework.

3.45 The final proposal map should identify a hierarchy of routes for cyclists as described in Paragraph 3.16. The proposals map should also identify:-

(i) Speed limits;

(ii) Traffic calmed areas or routes;

(iii) Traffic management and accident remedial measures;

(iv) Areas with restricted access points;

(v) The proposed cycle route network, and

(vi) Cycle parking locations.

3.46 Step 6 : Assessment and Evaluation:

3.47 It is important if schemes are to be successfully promoted that they should be subject to Project Assessment. This will also assist models to be developed upon which future schemes can be assessed. Measures for cyclists should, like other transportation schemes, be introduced where they are most effective in achieving the individual objectives set. Assessment of proposals is therefore important in order that:-

(i) The proposed cycling measures may be assessed against other transportation schemes to ensure that resources may be allocated efficiently to meet objectives in a cost effective manner;

(ii) Comparisons between similar routes may be made to identify the most effective combination of features along a cycle route;

(iii) Comparisons between different types of cycle schemes may be made to identify the most effective combinations of cycle facilities;

(iv) The benefits of investment in the proposed cycle facility may be recorded to assist in overall justification of the facility and future proposals.

3.48 The primary indicators for assessment are increases in cycle use and accident savings. Any proposed cycling measures should show improvements in one or both of these categories. Health, environmental and other benefits are likely to be dependent on these primary indicators.

3.49 Comprehensive frameworks for assessing and evaluating cycle facilities exist in various forms and are the topic of a variety of publications. In the Netherlands, computer models have been developed to enable alternative cycling infrastructure improvements to be assessed; however, use in this country remains in its infancy. The final choice of assessment method should be based on policy requirements.

3.50 A variety of different methods currently exist for assessing the benefits of investing in alternative schemes. Methods currently used range from conventional cost-benefit analysis based mainly on accident and time savings through to more complex methods of cost-benefit analysis which take account of additional benefits from sources such as improved air quality, tourism and amenity value.

3.51 Once constructed, schemes should be evaluated in order that a measure of their success may be recorded for future reference and any necessary amendments made. Monitoring should include the following:

(i) Sample monitoring of cycle flows for 3 years before (where feasible) and 3 years after implementation of measures to facilitate cycling;

(ii) Surveys to monitor user satisfaction before and after implementation of measures to facilitate cycling.

3.52 The simplest and most important measure of success for a cycle network is that cyclists choose to use the facility provided. This usage may be confirmed through questionnaire based surveys.

3.53 If the survey results appear to suggest there is only low usage then publicity leaflets may be useful to further promote the facility (Refer to Chapter 13). However cyclists tend to vary in their requirements and not all may choose to use, say, a cycle track in preference to a road carriageway. This is not necessarily a sign of failure provided that there are real benefits in terms of accident savings and the rights and safety of other users are not undermined.

Consultations

3.54 Local cyclists and cycling interest groups should be consulted throughout the process of devising a cycling strategy and planning a cycle network. They are likely to have detailed local knowledge of routes used by cyclists, and so offer an insight into potential problems and opportunities.

3.55 Consultation should not be used as a substitute for systematic surveys, planning and design. Most cycling organisations are voluntary and are unlikely to have the resources to become closely involved in detailed matters over a sustained period.

3.56 Other parties likely to be affected by or interested in the development of a cycle network should also be consulted. Refer to Appendix 2 for a directory of potential consultees.

3.57 Discussions should take place with transport authorities and operators in order that schemes of mutual benefit, such as bus lanes and bike and ride schemes, may be identified.

3.58 Consultation with the police is also essential as regards traffic management proposals.

3.59 Local groups representing pedestrians should be involved as much as possible. Where schemes may include sharing space with pedestrians, groups representing mobility and visually impaired people should be consulted.

3.60 It is recommended that where appropriate the Roads and Planning Authority should establish a Cycling Forum to aid consultations with interested organisations.

Programme

3.61 Once proposals have been developed they should be prioritised and whenever possible, integrated within existing programmes, such as bus priority measures, accident remedial measures, traffic calming schemes, pedestrianisation etc. depending on Roads and Planning Authority transport strategies.

3.62 Adequate time must be allowed for planning, consultation, design, Traffic Regulation Orders, land acquisition etc. Two or three years is not unusual. Experience has also shown that off-road schemes are not necessarily quicker or easier to implement than on-road schemes.

Future Work

3.63 During the Consultation Period for ‘Cycling by Design’ the Scottish Executive intends to undertake research on the formal assessment of cycling projects. This work will feed into a revision of this chapter.

COMMENTS : CHAPTER 3

Cycling by Design’s prime objective is to draw together and rationalise existing cycling design guidelines into a single comprehensive, coherent reference document that may be used as a source of sound technical advice. In order to achieve this objective it is imperative that Cycling by Design is developed through consultation. Please provide any comments or suggested amendments you may wish to put forward with respect to the preceding chapter.

Comments/Proposed Amendments:

Please send your comments to:

The Scottish Executive Development Department,

Standards Traffic & Environment,

Area 2-E,

Victoria Quay,

Edinburgh EH6 6QQ.

On or before 31^st December 2000.

< Previous | Contents | Next >

The information contained on this WWW site is Crown Copyright but may be reproduced without formal permission or charge for personal or in-house use. Privacy and Content Disclaimer.

For general enquiries about this web site email ceu@scotland.gov.uk or fill out our online questionnaire.