2013 11-11 planning and designing for cyclists
DESCRIPTION
Cycling Scotland presentation on planning and designing for cyclists.TRANSCRIPT
Planning and Designing for CyclistsPeter Leslie – Senior Engineer
By the end of this workshop, candidates will be able to:
1. Discuss current policy and guidance aiding the delivery of cycle infrastructure in Scotland.
2. Identify design principles for planning and designing for cyclists.
3. Explain the basic principles of retrofitting cycle route design into existing infrastructure.
Learning Outcomes
3
By 2020, 10% of all journeys in
Scotland will be by bike.
150km of routes designed and installed
Numerous more reviewed/audited
Loon fae Aberdeen
Change Behaviour
Why was I not on site for the M77 / M74 / AWPR?
Cycle Action Plan for Scotland
Sustrans (Funding)
CSGN - Planning
How do you look to change behaviour In your work
You - What is your role
Appin – Car Park
Cycle Action Plan for Scotland
11/04/20239 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Introduction
Presentation Content
• Why Cycling by Design?
• The Evolution of Cycling by Design
• A Tour of the Document
• The Cycle Audit Process
• Summary
10 11/04/2023 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Why Cycling by Design?
11/04/202311 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Trunk Road Cycling Initiative
•Trunk Road Cycling Initiative launched November 1995
•Five Actions Detailed in Office Instruction 3/96
• Trunk Road/NCN Development
• Co-operation with Sustrans
• Redetermination of footways
• A74(M) Cycleway
• Consideration of cyclists in all new schemes
Policy
Led to the Creation of Cycling by Design 1999
11/04/202312 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
CAPS
•Launched June 2010 by Transport Minister
•Contains 17 Actions to Promote Cycling in Scotland
• Skills Development
• The Network
• Delivery
•Multi-agency Approach
Policy
Vision: By 2020, 10% of All Journeys Taken in Scotland by Bike
11/04/202313 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
CAPS
CBD Supports several CAPS actions, but especially:
Action 8: To promote the use of planning policy, access legislation and design guidance to a wide range of professionals; and to promote the outcomes of access legislation in the form of leisure activities.
Outcome 8: More well designed, accessible cycling facilities across Scotland
Policy
CBD is the Design Guidance outlined in CAPS
11/04/202314 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Road Safety
•Cyclists recognised as having less protection if an accident occurs
•Accidents involving vulnerable users including cyclists one of four main accident types
•Action 11: “…improve cycling provision with cycle friendly design”
Policy
11/04/202315 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Scotland PLC Tourism
VisitScotland figures (2003):
• Cycle tourism responsible for 1 million trips to Scotland (8% of all visitors)
• Revenue from cycle tourism: £219 Million
• 50% increase in cycle tourism by 2015
• Scotland is a world leader in mountain biking
• Sustrans National Cycle Network
11/04/202316 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Scotland PLC Tourism
National Cycle Network Trunk Road Network
High Interaction between NCN and Trunk Road Network
11/04/202317 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Public Health
Obesity Route Map Action Plan, March 2011:
•to deliver the Cycle Action Plan for Scotland
•to maintain and extend the National Cycle Network
•ensuring development plans take into account walking and cycling
Policy
11/04/202318 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Planning
New development must:
•be accessible by cyclists
•make best use of or add to existing cycle networks, or create new networks
•prioritise walking and cycling above motorised modes
Policy
Important for Development Management
11/04/202319 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Designing Streets
• Complements principles
• Encourages direct and coherent routes for cyclists
• Has presumption in favour of cyclists at access controls
• Promotes permeability
• Recognises at low volume/low speed dedicated facilities may not be required
• CBD intended for wider area application, not just residential streets
Policy
CBD Compliments Designing Streets
11/04/202320 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Disability Discrimination
• Cyclist facilities often shared with pedestrians
• Gradients and crossfalls
• Dropped kerbs and crossing points
• Wheelchair and mobility scooter users
• Visually impaired users
Policy
CBD Guidance has Access for Disabled People Built In
11/04/202321 Cycling by Design - 2010 Edition
Why Cycling by Design? Policy
Cycling by Design aims to Implement these Policies for Cyclists
Barriers to Cycling
What factors deter you from cycling / cycling more often?
29
7 6 610
26
1012
0
10
20
30
40
50
Dangerfromtraffic
Notenough
roadspace
Lack ofgood
routes
Noaccessto bike
Journeytime too
long
Weather Toophysical
Other
%
Barriers to Cycling
What is the principal factor that deters you from cycling/ cycling more often?
11/04/202322 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Why Cycling by Design? Policy
Infrastructure Related Issues - 49% of Responses Good Quality Design an Imperative!
23 11/04/2023 Cycling by Design - 2010 Edition
Evolution of Cycling by Design
11/04/202324 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Background
• Cycling by Design originally published 1999 as a consultative draft
• Updated June 2010
• Contains information on cyclists’ needs, network planning, geometric standards and cycle audit
• Consideration mandatory on the Trunk Road network
• Commended for use by local authorities and others
Cycling by Design
11/04/202325 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
2010 Update Process
Cycling by Design 1999
Technical ExpertiseCycle Designers, Roads Designers, Accessibility experts, Economists,
Planners, Environmental Consultants, Maintenance experts,
Road Safety Auditors
Disability Discrimination ActTransport Scotland’s Good Practice Guide for Roads
Independent Review Fife Council
City of Edinburgh CouncilGlasgow City CouncilForestry Commission
Sustrans
Good Practice Design Examples
East RenfrewshireClackmannanshireCity of Edinburgh
FifeDumfries & Galloway
Argyll & ButeHighland
Technical GuidanceUK Cycle Design Guidance
(DfT, TfL, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, SESTRANS,
Edinburgh)UK Roads Design Guidance (DMRB, Transport Scotland)
European Cycle Design Guidance (CROW, Malmo, Copenhagen, Danish Cycle
Parking)
Cycling by Design 2010
1999 ConsultationComments received
Cycling by Design
11/04/202326 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Key Changes
• Revisit aim of the document: technical guidance not policy
• Technical update of design guidance
• Incorporate Scottish good practice
• Improve navigation
• New definitions of terminology
• Clear definition of minimum widths
• Rationalisation of design speeds
• Taking the pragmatic view
Cycling by Design
27 11/04/2023 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
A Tour of The Document
11/04/202328 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
11/04/202329 Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
11/04/202330
Overview
Workshop
• Cyclists’ Needs & Trip Purposes
• Core Design Principles
• Hierarchy of Measures
Review
• Link Specification Guide
• Network Planning Process
Planning for Cyclists
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202331
Hierarchy of Measures Planning for Cyclists
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202332
On or Off Carriageway? Planning for Cyclists
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202333
Network Planning Process Planning for Cyclists
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Skill Level
Skill Level• Novice;• Intermediate; and• Experienced.
Journeys completed by Cyclists
• Neighbourhood• Commuting• School• Day Trips• Touring• Sports
(Based on CBD 2010)
Design Principles
• Coherence – • Door step
• Directness – • Time Saving
• Safety – • Feel Safe
• Comfort – • Surface
• Attractiveness – • Fit Surroundings
11/04/202337
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202338
Overview
Workshop
• Cycle Design Speed
What would you use as a design speed?
Review
• Visibility Parameters
• Alignment
Geometric Design
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202339
Design Speed & Visibility Geometric Design
1.0m(min)
Eye Height2.2m max
Visibility Envelope
Dynamic Sight Distance
1.0m(min)
Eye Height2.2m max
1.0m(min)
2.2m
Eye Height2.2m max
Visibility Envelope
Stopping Sight Distance
Dynamic Sight Distance Stopping Sight Distance
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Design parameter
Network hierarchy
Long distance/ commuter Local access
Design Speed (kph)30 20
Minimum Dynamic Sight Distance (DSD) (m)65 45
Minimum Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) (m)35 25
11/04/202340
Design Speed & Visibility Geometric Design
CycleRoute
Visibility Envelope
Carriageway
Y-Distance(Refer to Table 3.3)
Y-Distance(Refer to Table 3.3)
X-Distance(Refer to Table 3.2)
Junction/Crossing Visibility Splay
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
‘X’ distance (m) Control and Comments
4.0m Cycle route approach to a road – Desirable Minimum
2.0m Cycle route approach to a road – Absolute Minimum
1.0m ‘Jug handle’ crossing* – Absolute Minimum
85th Percentile speed of main road vehicles (kph)
120 100 85 70 60 50 30
Y-Distance (m) * 295 215 160 120 90 70 35
Also Reduced Values for Cycle/Pedestrian Networks in CBD
11/04/202341
Vertical & Horizontal Alignment Geometric Design
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Design parameter
Network hierarchy
Long distance/ commuter Local access
Design Speed (kph) 30 20
Minimum Dynamic Sight Distance (DSD) (m) 65 45
Minimum Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) (m) 35 25
Horizontal alignment Desirable Minimum Radius (m) 25 15
Minimum Bellmouth Radius at junctions (m)
4.0 4.0
Vertical alignment Desirable Minimum Crest (k) 14.1 6.8
Absolute Minimum Crest (k) 5.3 1.3
Sag values are not likely to be a controlling factor at cycle speeds and are, therefore, not specified.
Gradient Desirable Maximum 3% 3%
Absolute Maximum* 7% 7%
Crossfall Absolute Maximum 2.5% 2.5%
11/04/202342
Vertical Alignment - DDA Geometric Design
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Location Gradient
General cycle facility Desirable Maximum 3%
Absolute Maximum 5%7%
Over 5m*Over 10m*
On the immediate approach to priority junctions Absolute Maximum 3%
On the approach ramp to a bridge or subway (7% also requires speed controls)
Desirable Maximum 3%
Absolute Maximum 5%7%
Over 5m*Over 10m*
*DDA Implication – Gradients Above 5% are Considered a Ramp
11/04/202343
Facilities for Disabled People Geometric Design
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Rest Areas on an Off-road Route Rest Areas on a Bridge Structure
11/04/202344
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202345
Overview
• Appropriate Carriageway Conditions
• Traffic Management
• Traffic Calming
• Rural Situations
Traffic Volume & Speed
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202346
Carriageway Conditions Traffic Volume & Speed
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Good Conditions: <3,000 veh/day and <35kph 85th %ile speed
11/04/202347
Traffic Management Traffic Volume & Speed
1.5m Desirable Minimum1.2m Absolute Minimum
Tw
o way road
1.5m Desirable Minimum1.2m Absolute Minimum
Build-out may be provided to preventparked cars obstructing cyclists.
Various features may be used tocreate road closures:- Extended footway- Landscape planters/tree planting- Permanent and lockable bollards- Emergency gates
Diag No.955Diag No.616
Bollards
Diag No.616Diag No.955
1.5m Desirable Minimum1.2m Absolute Minimum
Build-out may be provided toprevent gap being obstructed by
parked cars.Bollards
Bollards
Minor Road Closure
False One-way Street
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Presumption Cyclists Exempt from Access Restrictions & One Way Streets
11/04/202348
Traffic Calming Traffic Volume & Speed
Central Island Pinch Point
1.5m desirable min1.2m absolute min
Segregation kerb of min 0.5m widthto prevent vehicles encroaching oncycle lane.
Crossing pointwhere appropriate
CycleLane
1.5m desirable min1.2m absolute min
CycleLane
Clearance strip of min 0.5mwidth to discourage
encroachment on cycle lane
Verge marker postVerge marker post
3.0m
Verge marker posts
Verge marker posts
W
A
Verge marker posts
Verge marker posts
Chicane
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Desirable Min 1.5m, Absolute Min 1.2m – But don’t forget the Gullies!
11/04/202349
Rural Situations Traffic Volume & Speed
Road closure or gate. Gatecan be left locked or unlocked.
Field Access
Signs and combinations of signs to be used forrestricted access to roads. Further options include:
- Weight/width restrictions- "unfit for Motor Traffic" sign- "Road Closed...Miles Ahead" sign- "Gated Road" sign
1.2m min1.5mpreferredmax.
Optionalcattle grid
Diag No. 619 Diag No. 816
Diag No. 620 Diag No. 954.4
Typical Restricted Access Plan
Typical Gated Road Closure
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202350
Cycling by Design 2010
Introduction
1. Planning for Cyclists
2. Geometric Design
3. Traffic Volume & Speed
4. Allocating Carriageway Space
5. Off-Carriageway Facilities
6. Junctions & Crossings
7. Cycle Parking
8. Public Transport Integration
9. Construction & Maintenance
10.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202351
Overview
Workshop
• Cycle Lanes
Width of Lanes?
• Kerb Segregated Cycle Lanes
Two Way verus One Way
• Bus Lanes
Width?
• Cycle Lanes at Bus Stops
Design out the issue
Carriageway Space
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202352
Cycle Lanes Carriageway Space
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202353
Cycle Lanes Carriageway Space
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Standard Width (m) Comments
Maximum Width 2.5*Lanes of this width should be used where cycle flows are expected to be >150 cycles/ peak hour and therefore cycles overtaking within the lane can be expected.
Desirable Minimum Width 2.0*The minimum width that should be considered for a cycle lane with width for cyclists to pass each other.
Absolute Minimum Width 1.5**The running width of the lane should be free from obstructions such as debris and unsafe gullies.
* Cycle lanes over 2.0m wide in areas of car parking may attract drivers to park in them. Physical barriers, mandatory lane markings or parking and loading restrictions can prevent this.
** Lane widths narrower than 1.5m can present a hazard to cyclists and motor vehicle drivers. Only in exceptional circumstances should widths down to 1.0m be considered where it is safe to do so – for example where stationary traffic blocks the route to an advance stop line and the proposed lane is safe from obstructions such as gullies.
Similar Tables also Provided for Contraflow and Kerbed Cycle Lanes
Diag. 1040.4 hatching.1 in 10 taper
Refer to Table 5.2
Diag 1024(1600 high)
Diag.1004
Diag. 1057 at regular intervalsover length of parking bays
Colouredsurfacing
Parking bays
Parking bays
Refer to Table 5.3
Footway
Footway
11/04/202354
Cycle Lanes Carriageway Space
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
StandardWidth
(m)Comments
Desirable Minimum
1.0*Ensures that a cyclist does not need to deviate if a car door is opened fully.
Absolute Minimum
0.5
Will require a cyclist to deviate within the cycle lane if a car door is opened. The cycle lane width in this case should be at least 1.5m, otherwise the cyclist will need to leave the cycle lane to avoid collision.
* Where required, a clearance strip of 1.5m will permit access for disabled people, without affecting cyclists using an adjacent lane.
11/04/202355
Dealing with Bus Stops Carriageway Space
Nominal footprint ofbus shelter 4.0m x 1.05m.
Mandatorycycle lane
Advisorycycle lane
Mandatorycycle lane
Back offootway Nominal 12m
Bus Layby
Nominal footprint ofbus shelter 4.0m x 1.05m
2m desirable min(1.5m absolute min)
Kerb-faceinlet gullies
Refer toTable 5.2
Footway
Tactile Paving& Drop kerbs
Tactile Paving& Drop kerbs
Mandatorycycle lane
Mandatory cycle lane
Back of footway
Refer toTable 5.2
Access kerb & transitionsNominal 7.6m
Nominal footprint ofbus shelter 4.0m x 1.05m.
ramp1.8m
ramp1.8m
Mandatorycycle lane
Mandatorycycle lane
0.5m
ramp3.6m
ramp3.6m
0.5m
Kerb faceinlet gullies
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Guidance on On/Off-Street Transitions also Given
11/04/202356
Bus Lanes Carriageway Space
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Standard Width (m) Comments*
Optimal Width 4.6
This width allows a bus to pass a cyclist within the bus lane. A 1.5m wide advisory cycle lane may be provided within the bus lane if considered desirable.
Desirable Minimum Width
4.25
Although a bus is still able to pass a cyclist within the bus lane, safe passing width is affected and this width of lane should only be provided over short distances. A 1.2m wide advisory cycle lane may be provided within the bus lane if desirable.
Absolute Minimum Width
4.0
An Absolute Minimum width of 4.0m allows cyclists to pass stopped buses within the bus lane but may encourage unsafe overtaking of cyclists by buses, particularly where the adjacent traffic lane has queuing traffic.
Limiting Width 3.0 – 3.2
The width of the bus lane to prevent overtaking within the lane itself. A bus will be required to straddle adjacent lanes to pass a cyclist, thereby encouraging safe overtaking.
Lane Widths between 3.2m and 4m Should be Avoided
57
Workshop 3 – Route Objectives
58
Workshop 3 – Route Objectives – 5 minutes
You are the Local Authority
Who would you design it for – Change Behaviour?
What would be your 3 main objectives of the project?
59
Workshop 3 – Actual Route Objectives
1. Remove Physical Barrier2. Segregated Facility
3. Quality Infrastructure – Central Station – Destination
4. Deprived Area5. Active Travel and Route Connections
60
Existing Route - Characteristics
Town CentreGrid Plan
Main East / West LinksOrigin / Destination
Route set by Bridge and Station
61
Workshop 4 - On Road Design
Waterloo Street
One Way Street – Towards M8
3 Travelling Lanes – Bus Stops/RouteNorth Side of Street – Horizontal Parking
11/04/202362
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202363
Overview
• Principles
• Cycleways
• Cycle Paths
• Vehicle Restricted Areas
• Access Controls
Off-Carriageway Facilities
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202364
When to Segregate? Off-Carriageway Facilities
1000 peds/hr/metre width (0.2 peds/m length/m width)
50m length
2mwidth
Based on a walking pace of 5km / hr
500 peds/hr/metre width (0.1 peds/m length/m width)
300 peds/hr/metre width (0.06 peds/m length/m width)
200 peds/hr/metre width (0.04 peds/m length/m width)
100 peds/hr/metre width (0.02 peds/m length/m width)
50m length
50m length
50m length
50m length
2mwidth
2mwidth
2mwidth
2mwidth
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Combined density (users/hr/m)*
Recommended arrangement
< 100 Shared use is usually appropriate (cycles give way).
101 – 199 Segregation may be considered.
> 200 Segregation should be considered.
11/04/202365
Segregated Cycleways Off-Carriageway Facilities
Carriageway
2.4m
2.4m
2.4m
Fo
otp
ath
SegregatedCycleway
0.8m 0.8m
Shared Cyclepath
Reminder tactilearea
'Start' and 'End'tactile area
2.4m
SegregatedCyclepath
Tramline tactile Ladder tactile
Max 50mmvertical kerb
SEGREGATED BY KERB
SEGREGATED BY CENTRALDELINEATOR STRIP (NOTE 2)
SEGREGATED BY VERGEPedestrians
OnlyCycles Only1.0m
Verge
Cycles Only
Cycles Only
PedestriansOnly
PedestriansOnly
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202366
Shared Cycleways Off-Carriageway Facilities
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Facility Width (m) Comments
Segregated cycleway or cyclepath
One way cycles only Desirable Minimum
2.0 Operates satisfactorily for one-way flows of up to 150 cycles per hour with minimal overtaking anticipated.
Absolute Minimum
1.5 The running width required that is free from obstructions such as debris, gullies, line markings and street furniture.
Two way cycles only Desirable Minimum
3.0 Operates satisfactorily for two-way flows up to 300 cycles per hour.
Absolute Minimum
2.0* Operates satisfactorily for two-way flows of up to 200 cycles per hour free from obstructions such as debris, surface gullies, line markings and street furniture.
Pedestrian only space
Desirable Minimum
2.0 The minimum width in normal circumstances to permit unobstructed passage by opposing wheelchairs.
Absolute Minimum
1.5 Acceptable over short distances in specifically constrained environments, such as at bus stops or where obstacles are unavoidable (Transport Scotland 2009).
Shared cycleway or cyclepath
Pedestrian and cycle space
Desirable Minimum
3.0 Typically regarded as the minimum acceptable for combined flows of up to 300 per hour.
Absolute Minimum
2.0** Can operate for combined flows of up to 200 per hour but will require cycles and pedestrians to frequently take evasive action to pass each other.
* Widths as low as 1.5m may be acceptable over short distances where there is no alternative.** In particularly constrained situations or for combined flows of less than 100 per hour, a width of 1.5m may be considered over short distances
where no alternative is available.
Guidance also Provided for Clearances to Fixed Objects
11/04/202367
Cyclepaths Off-Carriageway Facilities
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202368
Access Controls Off-Carriageway Facilities
Preferably two gaps
1.5m Preferred maxGap 1.2m absolute min
Lockable/removablebollard for maintenance
3.0m desirable min
Note: Rider meets barrier on left hand side first
2.0m desirable min1.5m absolute min
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202369
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202370
Overview
• Crossing Assessment
• At Grade Junctions & Crossings
• Grade Separated Junctions & Crossings
Junctions & Crossings
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202371
At-Grade Crossing - Urban Junctions & Crossings
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Diag No.956
Diag No.956
Build-out
Foot
way
Coloured surface preferred
Min 10m
Diag No.950Note: Distance plate DiagNo.572 may be applied.
Diag No.950
Extent of warningcontrasting colour
treatment
CyclepathCyclepath
Reflective bollards
Foot
way
Buff coloured blister tactile
Dimensions for Central Islands also Provided
11/04/202372
At-Grade Crossing - Rural Junctions & Crossings
Diag No.956
Verge
Diag No.956
Verge
Rumble strips(15mm height, verticalface not to exceed 6mm)
High Friction Surfacing(black calcined bauxite)should only be used onroads with speed limits> 40mph
Edge of carriageway marking
Diag No.1012.1(width of line 150mm)
Diag No.950 with supplementaryplate to diagram No. 950.1
XXX ydscrossingCycles
55m
XXX ydscrossingCycles
Diag No.950 with supplementaryplate to diagram No. 950.1
XXX ydscrossingCycles
XXX ydscrossingCycles
Diag No.950 with supplementaryplate to diagram No. 950.1
Diag No.950 with supplementaryplate to diagram No. 950.1
2.5mabsoluteminimum
ChicaneRefer to Note 1
5.75m min
10m
Admiral™ or similarspecification bollards
Buff coloured blister tactile
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
Diag No.956
Drop kerb at crossing pointto be flush with carriageway.
Variable width
Verge
Diag No.956
10m desirable minimum
3.0m min
ChicaneRefer to Note 1
2.5m a
bsolute min
.
Min 10.0m
Extent of warningcontrasting colour
treatment
Min 5.0m
Diag No.950 with supplementaryplate to diagram No. 950.1
CyclescrossingXXX yds
CyclescrossingXXX yds
Buff coloured blister tactile
specification bollardsWhite Admiral™ or similar
11/04/202373
At-Grade Crossing - Dual Junctions & Crossings
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202374
Side Road Crossings Junctions & Crossings
Buff coloured blister tactile Diag No.956
3.0m desirable minimum
Diag No.956
Diag No.602
Absolute min 2.5m(Refer to note 1)
Diag No.950Note: Distance plate DiagNo.572 may be applied.
Restrict on-street parkingto ensure visibility
Bendout
Diag 610Illuminated Bollard
(Refer to note 2)
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202375
Roundabouts Junctions & Crossings
a) COMPACT ROUNDABOUTFOR USE BY MIXED TRAFFIC
Central overrun areamay be provided
Single lane entry andexit width (4.25m)
Narrow circulatinglane width (5-7m)
Toucan crossing(staggered)
Segregated cyclewayfacility
Priority crossing
Cycle lanes
Shared cycleway
b) ROUNDABOUT WITHCYCLEWAYS
ICD range of 25m-35m
Entry and exits are perpendicularto the centre of roundabout
Central island diameterrange of 16-25mm
Minimal flares on entries
It is recommended that the cyclewayshould be two-way wherever possible.
Red colouredblister tactile
Buff coloured blister tactile
Ladder tactile
For transitions referto Figure 6.8
Ladder tactile
Tramline and ladder tactiles toindicate segregated cycleway
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202376
Grade Separation Junctions & Crossings
Pedestrians Cycles
Central delineator strip
1.4m
FIGURE 7.17A : NEW BRIDGE SECTION
3.0m min two way2.0m min one way 0.5m Clearance where practical
(Refer to Table 6.3)
Shared cycleway
FIGURE 7.17B : EXISTING ROAD BRIDGE SECTION
Existing parapets should be retained subjectto safety audit and monitoring
Where required, consideration shouldbe given to reducing carriageway lanewidths in order to widen the cycleway.
(Refer to Table 6.2) (Refer to Table 6.2 and 6.3)
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202377
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202378
Overview
• Planning for Cycle Parking
• Location and Access
• Detailed Design
Cycle Parking
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202379
Planning for Cycle Parking
• Basic Requirements
• User Requirements
• Demand and Capacity Requirements
Cycle Parking
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202380
Location & Access
• Proximity to Destinations
• Security
• On-street/Off-Street
Cycle Parking
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202381
Detailed Design Cycle Parking
Sheffieldstands
1.8m Absoluteminimumclearance
0.9m
1.2m Desirable Min1.0m Absolute Min
0.6m Desirable Min0.5m Absolute Min
2.0m Desirable Min1.8m Absolute Min
2.0m Desirable Min1.8m Absolute Min
0.9m
2.5m Desirableminimumclearance
1500mm
1500mm
Parallel Configuration
150
0m
m
In Line Configuration
Recommended 1500mm access aisles around three sides of units.
Note: All dimensions are in millimetres
650mm 900mm typ. 1500mm
190
0m
m1
50
0m
m1
50
0m
m
Unit height : 1400mmDoor Opening : /50mmDoor Arcs : 95°
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202382
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202383
Overview
• Importance of Integration
• Bike and Ride
• Cycle Carriage
• Public Cycle Hire
Public Transport
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202384
Integration
• Links to Rail Stations
• Parking at Stations
• Buses, Coaches & Ferries
• Cycle Hire Schemes
Public Transport
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202385
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202386
Overview
• Sustainability
• Construction within Carriageway
• Construction outwith Carriageway
• Lighting
• Maintenance Regime
Construction/Maintenance
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202387
Cycleway Construction/Maintenance
Fall=2.5%
Surface Course
Binder Course
Subbase
300x100mm Class ST 1concrete kerb foundation and haunch
200x50mm flat-toppedP.C heel kerb, laid flush
FORMATION
Kerb detail asrequired
375x150mm Class ST1concrete kerb foundation
and haunch
Typical road drainageRefer to note ii
Margin. (refer to note iii)
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202388
Rural Cyclepath Construction/Maintenance
Minimum 60mm deep layer of DBM(14mm stone). Path to have minimum
2.5% camber on dismantled railway, fallto suit tie-ins at disused road.
2500mm Shared cyclepath
Formation to be sprayed with approvednon-toxic weedkiller
Minimum 100mm deep sub-base ofType 1, compacted to refusal.
Use additional Type 1 to blind off anyexposed geotextile, and build up edgeof path. Difference between level ofpath edge and verge to be between40mm and 60mm.
Desirable width of soft verge 500m
Geotextile
3500mm
500mm
Absolute minimum width of Type 1verge to be 300mm. Desirableminimum width to be 500mm.
FORMATION
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202389
Maintenance - Sweeping Construction/Maintenance
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202390
Maintenance - Cutting Construction/Maintenance
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202391
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202392
Trunk Road Audit Process Cycle Audit Overview
• Cycle Audit part of wider audit process on Trunk Roads
• Road Safety Audits and Accessibility Audits also undertaken
• Key Principle – Designers design, Auditors audit
• Audits to advise Designers/Project Sponsor of issues for consideration
• Final decisions on priorities taken by the Designer/Project Sponsor, not the Auditors
• Audits need to be seen in the context of the scheme as a whole
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202393
Avoiding Imbalanced Needs Cycle Audit Overview
Source: David Owen / Warrington Cycle Campaign
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202394
Audits in Scotland
The objectives of Cycle Audit are as follows:
• To ensure that the current and future needs of cyclists within a scheme are recognised and developed;
• To ensure that the infrastructure provided for cyclists is in accordance with current best practice; and
• To ensure that there are no elements of infrastructure within a scheme that will endanger or unnecessarily impede cyclists or other users.
Cycle Audit Overview
Key Objective – Meeting the Needs of Cyclists
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202395
Roles & ResponsibilitiesProject Sponsor • Key responsibility: approval• Agreeing the terms of reference for the scheme• Providing appropriate background information • Approves proposed Design Team Cycle Auditor
Design Team Leader • Key responsibility: facilitation. • Ensure that the objectives of the scheme are fully understood by
team• Ensures audit findings process flows through to the design itself• Proposes the Design Team Cycle Auditor
Design Team Cycle Auditor • Key responsibility: to set cycling objectives and audit design
against them• Consults with stakeholders, analyses & gathers of background data• Available to discuss issues and advise design team – a continuous
process
Cycle Audit Overview
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202396
Process Overview
Objective Setting and Context Report
Cycle Audit in Action
Preliminary Design Audit (Stage 1 Cycle Audit)
Detailed Design Audit (Stage 2 Cycle Audit)
Post-Construction Audit(Stage 3 Cycle Audit)
Progression from Each Stage only after Project Sponsor Approval
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202397
Context Report
• Undertaken before design commences
• Aim: to provide designers with an understanding of cyclists’ needs
• Review trip patterns
• Generators/attractors
• User characteristics
• Opportunities and constraints
• Consult with stakeholders
• Define scheme objectives
Cycle Audit in Action
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202398
S1 & S2 Design Audits
• Undertaken at key points in design process
• Aim: to check that design meets with defined objectives
• Demonstrate to Project Sponsor that cyclists’ needs are being met
• Check compliance with current best practice
• Highlight scheme constraints where limitations may apply for consideration
Cycle Audit in Action
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/202399
Post Construction Audit
• Undertaken once scheme in use
• Aim: check the detail
• Have objectives been met in practice?
• How are cyclists using the scheme?
• Is the route clear as expected?
• Is the quality of infrastructure right?
• Did anything change during construction?
• Are Improvements Possible?
Cycle Audit in Action
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/2023100
Cycling by Design 2010
1. Introduction
2. Planning for Cyclists
3. Geometric Design
4. Traffic Volume & Speed
5. Allocating Carriageway Space
6. Off-Carriageway Facilities
7. Junctions & Crossings
8. Cycle Parking
9. Public Transport Integration
10.Construction & Maintenance
11.Cycle Audit System
Appendices
Document Tour
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/2023101
Appendix A
• Details key features of principal legislation
• Roads (Scotland) Act
• Road Traffic Regulation Act
• Town & Country Planning (Scotland) Act
• Land Reform (Scotland) Act
• Disability Discrimination Acts 1995 and 2005
• Equality Act 2010
Appendices
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/2023102
Appendix B
• General design principles on signs and markings
• Sign sizes
• Avoiding ambiguity and coherence
• Legislation and guidance
• Examples
Appendices
Diag No 955Route for use by pedal cycles only
Diag No 956Route for use by pedal cycles
and pedestrians only
Diag No 957Route comprising two ways, separatedby the marking shown in Diag No. 1049or 1049.1 or by physical means, for useby pedal cycles only and by pedestrians
Diag No 958With-flow bus lane ahead
Diag No 958.1With-flow cycle lane ahead
Diag No 956With-flow bus lane which pedal cycles may
also use. Note: Any vehicle may enter the buslane to stop, load or unload where this is
not prohibited
Diag No 959.1With-flow cycle lane
Diag No 960Contra-flow bus lane.
Note: Any vehicle may enter thebus lane to stop, load or unload
where this is not prohibited.(Cycle symbol may be added
below the bus symbol)
Diag No 960.1Contra-flow cycle lane
Diag No 962.1Cycle lane on road at junction
ahead or cycle track crossing roadDiag No 963.1
Cycle lane with traffic proceeding from right(Sign for pedestrians)
Diag No 952.1Cycle lane on road at junction
ahead or cycle track crossing road
Diag No 962.2Contra-flow bus lane which pedalcycles may also use on road at
junction ahead
Diag No 968Parking for pedal cycles
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
103 11/04/2023
Evolution of Cycling By Design Beyond 2010 Edition
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/2023104
Beyond CBD 2010
• Account will be taken of future legislation/design changes
• Learning from implementation
• Comments welcomed from users of the document, cycling groups and individuals
• Document will evolve over time
• Acknowledgement that UK research base limited
• Further research may be undertaken
Evolution
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
105 11/04/2023
Summary
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
11/04/2023106
Summary
• CBD 2010 incorporates changes to legislation, latest best practice and stakeholder comment
• Document includes simpler navigation; more focus on guidance rather than policy
• Clearer definitions and emphasis on cyclist needs
• Cycle Audit system - an objective led approach
• Complements Other Scottish Government Policy
• Requirement on Trunk Roads
• Commended to others
• Understanding needs is key to success
Cycling by Design – A User’s Guide
107
Are we different from the market leaders
CROW vs CBD?
108
Cycling Scotland 2012 Conference
Think Bike Workshop
109
How to design Bicycle facilitiesSafety
Attractiveness
Directness
Cohesion
Comfort
5 mainrequirements
110
Sustainable Safety
Function, form and usein balance, from road
safety point of view
function: use of the road as intended by the road authoritydesign: the physical design and layout properties of the infrastructureuse: actual use of the infrastructure and behaviour of the road user
Functionof road
Designof road
Useof road
111
Road categorization Through roads: Long distance traffic Distributor roads: Connects areas Access roads: Access to properties Urban area: Distributor road Access road
Consequences:• Network• Routes
• Sections• Junctions
112
1970’s: Turning point
Workshop - What changed their mind?
113
Space
114
Traffic lights at National Museum:
± 20 cars in 40 seconds
> 50 cyclists in 10 seconds
Time
115
116
How to design Network
117
Single lane roundabout:
Outside build-up areaPriority to cars
Multi lane roundabout:
Junction / crossing
118
119
Bicycle is King
120
Why monitor cycling?
To measure impact on overarching objectives
To measure and demonstrate trends and progress
To account for the use of funds at local and regional level
To demonstrate links with other projects/departments
121
What do you monitor and why?
122
123
The Basics of Monitoring
In essence, there are two levels:– Strategic:
• Vision, Aim, Mission, etc.– Specific:
• Objectives, Targets, Goals, etc.
124
Strategic – Vision, Aim, etc.
What is the aspiration? What are you aiming for?– More people on bikes…?– More people active…?
125
Vision - Active Travel, Active Scotland
“Our vision is for walking or cycling to be the natural choice for short journeys, creating a healthier, socially inclusive, economically vibrant, environmentally friendly Scotland.”
126
Getting More Specific – Objectives
Objectives– Specific, measurable steps– What do you want to happen?
“To increase the number of children cycling to school”
127
Targets
Targets– Results to be achieved– Mostly quantifiable
“To increase the number of children cycling to school by 15%”
128
Targets (2)
SMART– Specific– Measurable– Achievable– Realistic– Time-bound
Establish a baseline!
129
Targets (3)
Inputs– Resources used
• “Amount of time spent training children to cycle”
Outputs– Measurable activities, things we
make/do• “Length of on-road cycle network”
Outcomes– Impacts from outputs, benefits of what
we make/do• “Number of children cycling to school”
130
Targets (3)
Indicators– Help measure the target:
• “number of children cycling to school”• “number of children receiving cycle training”• “number of bicycles repaired”• “number of cyclists on a particular road”
131
132
Do:– Have a number of SMART targets– Have a plan that identifies targets and how they
all link together– Use both output and outcome performance
indicators Do NOT:
– Have few and/or ill-defined targets – Rely on output performance indicators alone– Use a limited range of monitoring techniques– Have no idea what you are monitoring
Targets Summary
133
Assessment
What are the impacts of what we are doing and how are we doing in each aspect?
Use tools to help assess:– STAG– HEAT– SROI– National Assessment
134
Assessment - STAG
Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG)– When?
• Gov’t funding, support or approval for proposals to change transport system
– What?• Environment, Safety, Economy, Integration,
Access and Social Integration– Who?
• SG, LAs, developers and transport operators
www.transportscotland.gov.uk/stag
135
Assessment - HEAT WHO Health Economic Assessment Tool (HEAT)
– When?• To understand economic impact of health
benefits from cycling and walking– What?
• Savings in costs and mortality from walking/cycling interventions
– Who?• Anyone, but limited to adults and better at
‘population level’
www.heatwalkingcycling.org
136
Assessment - SROI
Social Return on Investment (SROI)– When?
• Understanding social impacts of interventions
– What?• Measure the difference made to people’s
lives and the level of impact– Who?
• Third sector normally
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/People/15300/SROI and http://www.sroi-uk.org/
137
Assessment – National Assessment
National Assessment of Cycling Policy– When?
• Assess the policies in place in LAs to support cycling
– What?• Looks at three elements: Planning, Action
and Monitoring– Who?
• Local Authorities (and Nat’l Parks in future)
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/People/15300/SROI and http://www.sroi-uk.org/
138
Evaluation
Comparative by nature – past with present ( baseline data or
starting point or recall of where things were in comparison with now)
– comparing examples of similar projects or programmes
139
Evaluation Did we do what we planned to do? If not, why
not? What worked? Why? What did not work? Why? What difference, if any, does the project make?
How have things changed over time and for whom ?
Is the project meeting needs? Whose needs? What do users/members/beneficiaries think about
the work? Is the donor's money well spent? Is it achieving
what the donor intended? What could we do differently? How can we use the learning to develop the
work?
140
The Final Stage
Doing something to act on the learning – MAKE CHANGES!
Without the final stage the evaluation is useless
141
Worked example…
What is/are the vision/objectives/targets you work towards in your organisation?
What if vision/objectives/targets change abruptly?
142
By 2020, 10% of all journeys in
Scotland will be by bike.
What do you think the 10% is now? Comments…
143
National Picture – Scotland Performs
144
National Picture – Scotland Performs
Objectives– Wealthier and Fairer– Safer and Stronger– Smarter– Greener– Healthier
Which of these are relevant to cycling? Why?
145
National Picture – Scotland Performs
16 National Outcomes– Key words for cycling...
• “sustainable places”• “communities”• “environment”• “environmental impact”• “employment opportunities”
146
National Picture – Scotland Performs
50 National Indicators, cycling relevant?– “Increase the proportion of journeys to
work made by public or active transport”– “Reduce Scotland’s carbon footprint”– “Increase physical activity”– “Reduce traffic congestion”– “Increase people’s use of outdoors”– “Reduce premature mortality”– “Increase proportion of healthy weight in
children”
147
National Picture – CAPS (2010)
10% of journeys in Scotland by bike by 2020
Local authorities – CAPS Delivery Forum– Other action-specific forums
Other organisations– CS, Sustrans, Transport Scotland
Other forums?– NCIG, CPG, Vulnerable Road Users, etc.
148
Local Authority Picture
32 different ways of doing things…
149
Local Authority Picture - Edinburgh
Active Travel Action Plan “By 2030, to make Edinburgh’s transport system
one of the most environmentally friendly, healthiest and most accessible in northern Europe…” – Transport 2030
Objectives– Better health; Better road safety; Better
environment; Benefits to businesses; Wider economic benefits
Targets (by 2020)– Cycling: 10% overall; 15% to work– Walking: 35% overall; 22% to work
150
What about data? Scottish Household Survey Scottish Recreation Survey Hands Up Scotland Survey Bikeability Scotland data Local cycling counts (automatic/manual) Local surveys (e.g., Citizen Panels) Project specific/event specific feedback On and on…
151
The Big Picture?
Making sense of it all
152
Monitoring Cycle Use - MVA Review current information sources
– Desktop– Consultation
Make recommendations on appropriate methods for LAs and others on collecting information for monitoring progress against SG targets/vision
153
Monitoring Cycle Use – MVA (2) Consultation
– 40 stakeholders and key partners– View on key aspects– Awareness of relevant datasets– How project could benefit– Views on ‘good’ and ‘bad’ practice
154
Monitoring Cycle Use – MVA (3) Datasets and SHS
– Good potential for existing data, but not sure how best to use it
– Are datasets relevant at local level?– Inconsistency on questions– Support for HUSS
Auto/manual counters– Main focus at a local level– Issues with consistency of data, resource and
maintenance
155
Monitoring Cycle Use – MVA (4) Resource and budgets
– Limited and stretched resource– Neglect of data collection and maintenance– Not always a priority– Concerns on ability to match fund
STANDARD GUIDANCE REQUESTED!
156
So what do you monitor? Manual counts Automatic counts School travel Cycle parking/usage Census Household surveys/travel diaries User surveys Others?
157
MONITORING TOOLKIT
Manual counts: Can give a detailed
picture of cycle usage over a short period
Can be used to validate automatic counts
Care needs to be taken in the location of counts
158
MONITORING TOOLKIT
Automatic cycle counts: Can give a detailed
picture of cycle usage over time
Can be used to validate manual counts
Care needs to be taken in the siting of counters, especially on-road cycling
159
MONITORING TOOLKIT
Automatic cycle counts: Are generally more statistically reliable Off-road counts alone may give a skewed
picture Data can be collected remotely
160
MONITORING TOOLKIT
School travel counts: Can be effective and
represent an important target area
Helps to reinforce children’s enthusiasm
Ideally should be carried out as part of a school travel plan
161
MONITORING TOOLKITTravel plan surveys: Can be effective and represent an
important target area Help to reinforce the organisation’s
commitment Questionnaires should gather both
qualitative and quantitative data on cycling
High response rate achievable Allows for an incremental approach
to provision e.g. parking
162
MONITORING TOOLKITBefore and after monitoring: Should be carried out on all new
schemes Useful to establish precedents
for similar schemes elsewhere May not be representative of
whole authority Capital costs for automatic
counters can be found as part of overall scheme
163
MONITORING TOOLKIT
Counts of cycle parking use: Can be carried out at specific
locations, such as health centres
Can help to assess the effectiveness of policies to encourage cycling to these destinations
If carried out regularly can be used as a proxy for overall cycling levels
164
MONITORING TOOLKIT
Census information: Measures journeys to work only Unparalleled accuracy of local information
on these journeys Useful to assess relative levels in different
local authority areas Unsatisfactory for assessment of
objectives, since monitoring only occurs every 10 years
165
MONITORING TOOLKITHousehold surveys / travel diaries: Useful data on attitudes (e.g. satisfaction
and perception) as well as usage Also information on modal choice factors Can measure background factors, such as
car ownership, income levels and place of work
but …
166
MONITORING TOOLKIT
Household surveys / travel diaries: Need high level of respondents to be
statistically reliable Most useful carried out in conjunction with
regular usage monitoring National Travel Survey add-ons are
possible but expensive - only feasible in large urban areas
167
MONITORING TOOLKITUser surveys: Can provide useful data on
user attitudes, especially satisfaction and perception
Need to be targeted carefully Are useful if looking at
reasons for choice of mode and route
168
Worked example… What about the 10%?
– Who are we measuring?– What is a ‘journey’?– How do we measure those journeys as a
proportion of all journeys?– What are some limitations?
169
170
Monitoring Cycle Use MVA Recommendations/findings:
– Any reporting of cycling mode share needs to incorporate other modes as well
– Household-based travel diary – Phrasing matters! ‘Usual mode’ questions are
biased against cycling Other datasets can inform other targets, but
they do not feed into the 10%!
171
Monitoring Cycle Use (2) Healthier
– HUSS, recreational trips, total trips/commuting trips, casualty/KSI
Greener– Total trips/commuting trips, HUSS
Wealthier– Total trips/commuting trips, tourism, cycling related jobs
Safer– 20mph zones, casualty/KSI
Smarter– Improved school performance, productivity
172
Taking Monitoring Forward Establishing a set of indicators to support
monitoring the 10% But is it enough? No! So let’s look at a few more
things:– Cycling to work/education– Cycling to school– Cycle training (adults and children)– Safety– Health– Economic benefit– Return on investment– Environmental impacts
173
Using Monitoring to Access Funding
Varies depending on funding source, but cycling cuts across many things
Examples– Cycling Scotland
• Bikeability Scotland, Support Plus – How many schools are delivering on-road training now? How many will deliver on-road training as a result of the funding?
• Cycle Friendly & Sust. Communities – Project aims, modal share changes, emissions, impact on sustainability in community, project partners, + or – outcomes, barriers?
– Sustrans• Accurate stats on usage and benefits, auto- or manual
counts, surveys of users.
174
Worked example…
What types of monitoring would help you in delivering cycling?– Think about: partners, funding
opportunities What should you monitor to help ‘future-
proof’ delivery of cycling?
175
Summary Strategic as well as specific Targets – Link to outcomes Ensure that you do monitor, but be clear on WHY
you are monitoring Ensure that what you monitor provides evidence
to support your vision and objectives Cycling cuts across many departments, utilise
this to the fullest
Relate this to Funding
Who are the funders for cycle projects at present?
Funders
Government / Transport ScotlandSustransLeaderAwards for All
Local Authorities
For further information review Spokes Briefing
How much do they each contribute?
The government through Transport Scotland / Sustrans are still the predominate funder for active travel projects
http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/2012/10/spokes-bulletin-114/
Sustrans – Community Links
Yesterday I provided information from my own projects how monitoring has allowed me to provide job satisfaction.
Sustrans – Community Links
Project SummaryShow Origin and Destinations
Places of Interest
Design – Use their manuals
Sustrans – Community Links
Project EndorsementCommunity CouncilPrimary SchoolSports Clubs
Sustrans – Community Links
Match FundingRTPSOther Council ProjectsCommunity Funding Celebrities
Sustrans – Community Links
Aims and BenefitsUsing existing counts (nearby data)Hands Up Survey
But how to turn them aroundMoney Talks – North Sea Cycle Route – £33 a day
Sustrans – Community Links
Aims and BenefitsUsing existing counts (nearby data)Hands Up Survey
But how to turn them aroundMoney Talks – North Sea Cycle Route – £33 a day
Stop Moaning
Justify a larger spend?
STAG – Project for a Bypass
We need to prove projects using the data which is of a benefit to the projects.
Adrian Davies / John Parkin
Sustrans – Community Links
School LinksBikeability
Transport HubsGet the providers to endorse the project
Council DepartmentsSounds daft but Access Officer, Planner and Parks for instance
Sustrans – Community Links
Community EngagementOpportunities to see the project and participateEqual Input / Influence
Sustrans – Community LinksMonitoring
Discussed this at length yesterday
I maintain get a counter in your bid
Sustrans – Community LinksDeliver and Phasing
Make sure the title includes Phase 1 – Prove you have further projects.
FundersOther Funders
LeaderCSGNActive Places – 2014Awards for AllLocal Authority - CWSS
SummaryTaken you through funding application
So what are the next steps for you and Cycling Scotland?
The floor is open to you to question or discuss any of the topics we’ve discussed
Thank You