sustrans design manual chapter 2 - european commission · 2018. 12. 20. · cycle-friendly...
TRANSCRIPT
-
Sustrans Design Manual Chapter 2
Network Planning for Cyclists (draft)December 2014
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
2 December 2014
About SustransSustrans makes smarter travel choices possible, desirable and inevitable. We’re a leading UK charity enabling people to travel by foot, bike or public transport for more of the journeys we make every day. We work with families, communities, policy-makers and partner organisations so that people are able to choose healthier, cleaner and cheaper journeys, with better places and spaces to move through and live in.
It’s time we all began making smarter travel choices. Make your move and support Sustrans today. www.sustrans.org.uk
Head Office Sustrans 2 Cathedral Square College Green Bristol BS1 5DD
© Sustrans December 2014
Registered Charity No. 326550 (England and Wales) SC039263 (Scotland)
Photography: Sustrans or CTC Benchmarking unless noted otherwise
Issue level: 01
Owned by: NCN Director
Contact: [email protected]
ContentsThis chapter of the Sustrans Design Manual should be read in conjunction with Chapter 1 “Principles and processes for cycle friendly design.” That chapter includes key guidance on core design principles, whether to integrate with or segregate from motor traffic, the space required by cyclists and other road users as well as geometrical considerations. Readers are also directed towards the “Handbook for cycle-friendly design” which contains a concise illustrated compendium of the technical guidance contained in the Design Manual. This chapter has initially been issued as a draft and it is intended that it be reviewed during 2015; feedback on the content is invited and should be made by 31 May 2015 to [email protected]
1. Key principles
2. Introduction
Function of a cycle network plan
Stages in cycle network planning and implementation
3. Stage 1: estimate cycling demand and network function
Journey attractors and trip patterns
Route function and hierarchy in the network
Cycle use targets
4. Stage 2: define route alignment and concept design
Identification of route options
Selection of preferred route alignment
Type of provision (concept design)
5. Stage 3: implementation priorities, budget and programme
Implementation approach and priorities
Budget
Programme
6. Stage 4: detailed design, construction & publicity
Detailed design and construction
Public engagement programme
7. Stage 5: monitor, evaluate, maintain and upgrade
8. References
-
3December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
1. Key principles
• development of a cycling network plan will help to ensure routes and facilities are coherent and provide for the travel patterns in the area, including target growth in cycling and planned changes in land use
• a network plan can provide the basis for budget and programme setting and prioritising implementation, and can ensure that opportunities arising from land-use development, transport projects and routine highway maintenance are captured to deliver and enhance parts of the network
• the network plan also has a promotional role in demonstrating the authority’s commitment to encouraging and facilitating cycling, particularly where the cycling network offers accessibility and journey time advantages compared to driving
• the network should connect all significant trip generators and attractors - schools and colleges, retail areas, primary healthcare and hospitals, businesses, public transport interchanges, leisure and visitor attractions and public open space – with residential areas
• the cycle network in most existing urban areas will predominantly utilise existing roads, modified where necessary to reduce traffic volumes and speeds and with cycle-specific measures where these provide filtered permeability, improve safety and user comfort, and/or reduce delays for cyclists. Traffic free routes can valuably supplement the road network where these provide additional connectivity, journey time or safety benefits and/or a more pleasant user experience
Fig 1.1 Examples of elements of a network• providing good access to and through
town centres and other local centres - this commonly requires mixed priority streets
• direct connections to public transport hubs and other trip generators
• filtered permeability - traffic cells, access for cyclists through road closures and vehicle restricted areas, contraflow facilities, exemption from restricted turns, cycle bridges across rivers and railways, short-cuts through parks
• area-wide 20mph limits and zones and other means to reduce traffic speed and volume
• giving a high priority to cycle friendly junctions at the design stage
• cycle lanes and advanced stop lines to enable cyclists to avoid queuing traffic
• cycle tracks alongside rivers and canals and on disused railways
• maximising route opportunities to and through new developments
• secure and convenient cycle parking at both trip ends
Major employer
Major employer
School
Riverside route
TOWN CENTRE
YHA
Museum
Pedestrian area
Bus Station
Residential area
Residential area
Park
National Cycle Route
National Cycle Route
Country park
Main cycle routes
Secondary cycle routes
Traffic free
bridge
Traffic free bridge
funded by new
development
New development
Traffic-free link through development site connecting to station
All roads subject to 20mph speed limit except those shown
Major employer
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
4 December 2014
• network implementation should prioritise routes with high travel demand, including potential demand from mode switching to cycling and walking. Conversely, implementing route opportunities ‘because they are available’, but which do not serve an existing or potential cycling or walking demand is likely to represent poor value for money
Filtered permeability, Bristol
Secure cycle parking, Cambridge
• implementation strategies commonly involve a combination of six approaches:
• area-based phases (ideally accompanied by smarter choices programmes)
• corridor-based (typically provision along and across main radial routes)
• targeted investment around major attractors (rail stations, employers)
• targeted investment at key priorities (e.g. bridges) to unlock barriers
• network-wide default interventions (advanced stop lines, flush kerbs etc)
• opportunistic delivery funded by land use development, transport schemes and routine maintenance
-
5December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
Access through pedestrianised street, Cambridge
• dialogue with existing cycle users and other stakeholders is very valuable throughout the network planning and implementation process; to identify route options, and post-implementation enhancements, and to help publicise the network to potential users
• investment in infrastructure and Smarter Choices at levels of £10 to £20 per capita per annum is advocated by the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group and in the Mayor of London’s 2013 Vision for Cycling in London. This level of investment delivered significant increases in cycling in the English Cycling Cities and Towns programme and is commonplace in leading cities in the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany
2. IntroductionFunction of a cycle network plan2.1Development of a cycling network plan for an urban or rural area will help to ensure routes and facilities are coherent and provide for the travel patterns in the area, including target growth in cycling and planned changes in land use.
2.2An agreed network plan can provide the basis for budget and programme setting and prioritising implementation. It can ensure that opportunities arising from land-use development, transport projects and routine highway maintenance are captured to deliver and enhance parts of the network.
2.3The network plan also has a promotional role in demonstrating the authority’s commitment to encouraging and facilitating cycling, particularly where the cycling network offers accessibility and journey time advantages compared to driving.
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
6 December 2014
Figure 2.1 Cycle network planning and implementation process (Section numbers in parentheses reference sections of this chapter)
Define implementation
approach & priorities
Map journey attractors
Existing demand: cycle use & other modes
Identify route alignment options
Existing trip patterns & potential growth
Define route function & hierarchy
Stage 1
Estimate cycling demand
Define
network function
(Section 3)
Planned land use developments
Stage 2
Define route alignment &
concept design
(Section 4)
Select route alignment options
Define cycle use targets*
Review existing cycle network &
other route options
Identify physical barriers to cycling & possible solutions
Stage 3
Define implementation
priorities, programme and
budget
(Section 5)
Stage 4
Detailed design
Construct & publicise
Support with smarter choices
programme
(Section 6)
Stage 5
Monitor & evaluate
Maintain & upgrade
(Section 7)
Consult c
ycle
users
and o
ther s
takehold
ers
Define type of provision (concept design)
Define budget and
programme
Construct network Publicise &
support with smarter choices programme
Monitor use & condition Evaluate
Maintain & upgrade
* Stages marked ‘*’ are related elements of a cycling strategy which will directly influence network planning in urban areas where high cycle usage / capacity requirements are key determinants of the type of provision.
Population & employment
targets*
Benchmarking*
Policy objectives*
Detailed design
Stage Tasks
Wayfinding strategy
Fig 2.1 Cycle network planning and implementation process (section numbers in parentheses reference sections of this chapter)
-
7December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
2.4The cycle network in most existing urban areas will predominantly utilise existing roads, modified where necessary to reduce traffic volumes and speeds and with cycle-specific measures where these improve safety and user comfort, reduce delays or provide filtered permeability for cycle users. Traffic free routes can valuably supplement the road network where these provide additional connectivity, journey time or safety benefits and/or a more pleasant user experience.
Stages in cycle network planning and implementation2.5The cycle network planning and implementation process involves five key stages. These are defined in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Cycle network planning and implementation stages
Project phase Stage
Network
planning
1. Estimate cycling demand (magnitude/ distribution
and potential increases) and network function
2. Define route alignment and concept design
3. Define implementation priorities, programme and
budget
Implementation 4. Detailed design, construct and publicise
Post-implementation 5. Monitor & evaluate, maintain and upgrade
2.6Network planning comprises the first three of these stages. The network plan also needs to respond to the final stage - post implementation monitoring and evaluation - to adapt and enhance the cycle network.
2.7Figure 2.1 illustrates the main tasks involved in each stage of the cycle network planning and implementation process. Each of these tasks is described in more detail in the following sections.
2.8The complexity of the network planning process will depend on the character of the network area. For example, the tasks of defining trip patterns, network demand and capacity requirements, and the optimum route alignment and type of provision will tend to be more complex in large urban areas than for small towns or rural networks.
2.9Dialogue with existing cycle users and other stakeholders is very valuable throughout the network planning and implementation process, particularly in identifying existing barriers to cycling, preferred route alignments and interventions needed to bring routes up to the requirements of the target users. Cycle users can have an important role in publicising the network and working with key target users, including employers and schools. Feedback from users is also very helpful in identifying refinements to networks post-implementation.
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
8 December 2014
Staff cycle parking, Nottinghamshire County Council
School cycle parking, Leicester
3. Stage 1: Estimate cycling demand and network function
Journey attractors and trip patterns
Journey attractors3.1The network should connect all significant trip generators and attractors - schools and colleges, retail areas, primary healthcare and hospitals, businesses, public transport interchanges, leisure and visitor attractions and public open space – with residential areas.
3.2Planned land use developments should be included in planning the network. Engagement with local authority officers responsible for strategic planning and development control can identify:
• future trip generators
• key cycling infrastructure needed to unlock development sites
• corridors that need to be safeguarded for future routes to and within development sites
• cycle parking requirements
• potential development funding opportunities that can deliver parts of the network
Journeys to work3.3 The Census journey to work origin-destination matrices can provide valuable insights into commuting patterns, desegregated by main transport mode. The pattern of existing journey to work trips by all modes within regular cycling distance (generally up to five miles each way, with a smaller proportion over that) can indicate the potential ‘market’ for cycling trips which a cycling network should aim to capture. This can inform both cycle usage targets and the setting of geographical priorities for implementing the cycle network.
3.4The 2011 Census data will reflect current car-dependent patterns of housing and jobs, which can be expected to change in the future to be more easily served by cycling, walking and public transport, in line with national and local transport policy. Because Census records main travel mode, it will underestimate cycle access trips made as part of longer mixed-mode journeys; and will not reveal the scale of access trips to rail or coach stations.
Journeys to school3.5In England, prior to July 2011, the National School Census provided a national database of school travel data including ‘pupil usual mode of travel’, which could be combined with pupil home postcode and school location data to map travel patterns to all schools. This provided near comprehensive datasets, available to local authorities, on cycling and walking mode share and the spatial distribution of school trips by travel mode.
-
9December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
3.6Since the withdrawal of the ‘pupil usual mode of travel’ data field from the national school census in July 2011, collection of these data relies on local authorities working with individual schools. Good information will exist in some areas to input to the cycle network design, but this is not comprehensive.
3.7Established in 2008, the Hands Up Scotland Survey is the largest national dataset to look at travel to school across Scotland. The project is funded by Transport Scotland and is a joint survey between Scottish local authorities, who collate the data, and Sustrans, who undertake overall collation, analysis and reporting.
Other trip purposes3.8Quantitative data on existing and potential cycle use for other journey purposes tend to be much less comprehensive. Some data may be available by interrogating local transport models, which will include data from historic surveys. Other information may be available from user surveys at specific destinations or on specific routes, but this will rarely be geographically representative of non-work trips in an area.
3.9Monitoring of existing cycle use will tend to underestimate potential demand, particularly by children and older people, who could switch to cycling if cycling conditions improve.
Design implications3.10In the absence of robust data on trip patterns and journey purpose, the approach to planning the cycling network should be to provide a comprehensive network of cycle routes connecting all journeys attractors to at least the minimum design standards (widths, lighting) identified in Chapters 4 and 5. Greater cycling widths, a higher cycling design speed (20mph) and lighting should be provided on all routes likely to be used for commuting. Greater widths should also be used on routes designed to cater for school journeys, and near public transport hubs and major visitor attractions, in town centres, and in other locations where high cycle and/or pedestrian flows are expected.
Cycle parking at station, Edinburgh
Cycle parking at other attractors, Cambridge
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
10 December 2014
Main route: cycle priority crossing, Bristol
Route function and hierarchy in the networkDefine schematic network and hierarchy of routes3.11In urban areas, the aim will be to develop a cycle network around a mesh width of no more than 250m, so that an alternative route is never more than 250m away, as used in The Netherlands. In London, a mesh width of up to 400m is recommended. The network may be organised around a hierarchy of routes as follows:
• main routes – key utility cycling routes connecting the town centre, public transport hubs and other main journey attractors with a design speed of 20mph. In many urban areas these will provide for each of the main radial corridors with orbital linkages
• secondary routes – other utility routes serving smaller destinations and forming a finer grid of routes between the main routes to deliver a 250m mesh spacing
• access routes – quiet roads and tracks serving individual properties/destinations
Example images of each type of route are shown on this page and the next.
3.12Within this network more strategic main routes would be identified for prioritisation of investment and promotion. Different interventions to encourage cycling will be appropriate in different places and on different categories of route. Main routes will be characterised by:
• high capacity for cyclists; greater widths, more storage capacity at advanced stop lines and signalised crossings
• priority over other traffic
• design speed of 20mph
• lighting
• potential route branding to assist wayfinding
3.14A schematic route network can be drawn up initially, comprising straight line connections between journey attractors, to help define the density of routes required and function of each route in the hierarchy. An example schematic network for Greater Bristol is shown in Figure 3.1. Figure 3.2 illustrates a further stage of developing this into a ‘tube map’ of routes.
Main route: 20mph, Central Oxford
Main route: mandatory cycle lane within bus lane, Cambridge
Main route: fully segregated route, London
Main route: stepped cycle track, Brighton
Main route: provision alongside guided bus way, Cambridge
Pho
to: S
arah
Toy
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
-
11December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
Secondary route: cycle contraflow, Penny Street, Lancashire
Secondary route: removal of centre line, Cambridge
Access route: – residential street with 20mph limit, Bristol
Access route: Part time permissive access route through car park, Lancaster Royal Infirmary
Secondary route: no entry except cyclists, Bristol
Main route: trees as traffic calming, Bristol
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
12 December 2014
Fig 3.1 Schematic network map for Greater Bristol showing journey attractors
Credit: Bristol City Council, South Gloucestershire Council, Arup
-
13December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
Q1
0
Azt
ecW
est
Brad
ley
Stok
e
Filto
n
UW
ECa
mpu
s
St G
eorg
esPa
rkN
etha
mLo
ck
Arn
osVa
le
Bart
onH
ill
Law
renc
eH
ill
Ash
ton
Hot
wel
ls
St Wer
burg
hs
Crib
bsCa
usew
ayPa
rkw
ay
Stat
ion
Old
land
Com
mon
Dur
ley
Hill
Sout
h Br
isto
lSk
ills
Acad
emy
Hen
grov
ePa
rk
Vict
oria
Park
Cate
rPa
rk
Ash
ton
Park
Leig
hW
oods
Clift
onSu
spen
sion
Brid
ge
Pars
onSt
reet
Stat
ion
Wel
lsRo
ad
Har
ecliv
e Ro
ad
Har
tcliff
e
Tott
erdo
wn
Bish
opsw
orth
Nai
lsea
Emer
son
Gre
en
Avon
Val
ley
Han
ham
Keyn
sham
Bris
lingt
on
Whi
tchu
rch
Bath
Bris
tol
Scie
nce
Park
Ham
broo
k
Yate
Sout
hmea
dH
ospi
tal
Wes
tbur
yon
-Try
mBl
aise
Esta
teSy
lvan
Way
Bren
try
Hen
bury
Lock
leaz
e
East
ville
St P
auls
Gre
enba
nk
Chel
tenh
amRo
ad
Bris
tol
City
Cen
tre
Clift
onD
own
Sea
Mill
s
Hor
field
Shire
ham
pton
Avon
mou
th
Port
ishe
adPi
ll
Dow
nend
Stap
le H
ill
King
swoo
d
Man
gots
field
War
mle
y
Bedm
inst
er
NO
RTH
SO
MER
SET
Fifteen minute cycle
SOU
TH G
LOU
CEST
ERSH
IRE
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10
F11
F12
F13
F14
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q1
0
Q11
Q12
Q1
3
Q1
4
Q1
5
Q1
6
F1
F1
F1
F2 F2
F2
F3 F3 F3
F4
F4
F4
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
Q1Q1
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q3
Q2
F5F5
F5F6
F6
F7
F8
F8
F8
F9
F9
F1
F4 F5 F6
F7
F2
F3
Q1
Q3
Q4
Q7
F9
Q8
Q13
Q4
Q10
Q7
Q7
Q6
Q6
F12
Q13
F11
F11
F11
F11
F12
F12
Q5
Q8
Q9
F13
F13
F13 F13
Q14
Q16
Q16Q1
5
Q11
Q11
Q11
Q12
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q4
F10
F10
The
Port
way
Wh
itel
adie
s/W
estb
ury
Ro
ad A
4018
Glo
uce
ster
Ro
ad A
38
Fish
po
nd
s/St
aple
ton
Ro
ad A
432
F5 T
wo
Mile
Hill
A42
0
F6 B
ath
Ro
ad A
4
F7 W
ells
Ro
ad A
37
F8 B
ish
op
wo
rth
/Har
tclif
fe A
38
F9 C
oro
nat
ion
Ro
ad A
370
F10
Inn
er L
oo
p O
rbit
al
F11
Inn
er M
idd
le O
rbit
al
F12
Ou
ter M
idd
le O
rbit
al
F13
No
rth
ern
Lo
op
Orb
ital
F14
Ou
ter R
ing
Orb
ital
Do
wn
s W
ay
Co
nco
rde
Way
Fro
me
Gre
enw
ay
Bri
sto
l Bat
h R
ailw
ay P
ath
Wes
ley
Qu
ietw
ay
Wh
itch
urc
h R
ailw
ay P
ath
Mal
ago
Gre
enw
ay
Fest
ival
Way
Pill
Path
– R
iver
Avo
n T
rail
Riv
er A
von
Tra
il
No
rth
Fri
ng
e Q
uie
tway
Yate
Qu
ietw
ay
Kn
owle
Qu
ietw
ay
St A
nn
e’s
Qu
ietw
ay
Purd
ow
n Q
uie
tway
Trym
Qu
ietw
ay
F1 F2 F3 F4 Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q1
0
Q1
1
Q1
2
Q1
3
Q1
4
Q1
5
Q1
6
F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F14
F13
F12
F11
F10
F7
F8
Cabo
tCi
rcus
Cent
reO
ldM
arke
t
Tem
ple
Mea
ds
City
of B
risto
lCo
llege
Ash
ton
Sout
hvill
e
Uni
vers
ity
Hot
wel
ls
Jam
esBa
rton
Q1
0
Bris
tol C
yclin
g Net
wor
kA
com
preh
ensi
ve n
etw
ork
of h
igh
qual
ity, co
ntin
uous
an
d di
rect
rou
tes
is e
ssen
tial to
mak
e cy
clin
g fo
r ev
eryo
ne fee
l ea
sy, sa
fe a
nd c
onve
nien
t.
The
Bris
tol Cy
clin
g M
anife
sto
map
s ou
t 20
0 m
iles
of
Cycl
ing
Free
way
s an
d Qui
etw
ays
conn
ectin
g ev
ery
area
, en
hanc
ed b
y lo
cal lin
ks.
Azt
ecW
est
Brad
ley
Stok
e
Filto
n
UW
ECa
mpu
s
St G
eorg
esPa
rkN
etha
mLo
ck
Arn
osVa
le
Bart
onH
ill
Law
renc
eH
ill
Ash
ton
Hot
wel
ls
St Wer
burg
hs
Crib
sCa
usew
ayPa
rkw
ay
Stat
ion
Old
land
Com
mon
Dur
ley
Hill
Sout
h Br
isto
lSk
ills
Acad
emy
Hen
grov
ePa
rk
Vict
oria
Park
Cate
rPa
rk
Ash
ton
Park
Leig
hW
oods
Clift
onSu
spen
sion
Brid
ge
Pars
onSt
reet
Stat
ion
Wel
lsRo
ad
Har
ecliv
e Av
e
Har
tcliff
e
Tott
erdo
wn
Bish
opsw
orth
Nai
lsea
Emer
son
Gre
en
Avon
Val
ley
Han
ham
Keyn
sham
Bris
lingt
on
Whi
tchu
rch
Bath
Bris
tol
Scie
nce
Park
Ham
broo
k
Yate
Sout
hmea
dH
ospi
tal
Wes
tbur
yon
-Try
mBl
aise
Esta
teSy
lvia
nW
ay
Bren
try
Hen
bury
Lock
leaz
e
East
ville
St P
auls
Gre
enba
nk
Chel
tenh
amRo
ad
Bris
tol
City
Cen
tre
Clift
onD
own
Sea
Mill
s
Hor
field
Shire
ham
pton
Avon
mou
th
Port
ishe
adPi
ll
Dow
nend
Stap
le H
ill
King
swoo
d
Man
gots
field
War
mle
y
Bedm
inst
er
Fifteen minute cycle
Q11
Q8
Q16
Q16
Q13
Q6
Q5
Q12
Q15
Q14
Q4
Q10
Q1
Q1 Q7
Q9
F14
F14
F13
F14
F14
F14
F12
F14
F14
F1
F1
F2
F3 F3
F11
F11
F5
F4
F4
F9
F8
F9
F8
F12
F6
Q2
Q3
Q2 F7
Q4
F13F1
Th
e Po
rtw
ay
F2 W
hit
elad
ies/
Wes
tbu
ry R
oad
A40
18
F3 G
lou
cest
er R
oad
A38
F4 F
ish
po
nd
s/St
aple
ton
Ro
ad A
432
F5 T
wo
Mile
Hill
A42
0
F6 B
ath
Ro
ad A
4
F7 W
ells
Ro
ad A
37
F8 B
ish
op
wo
rth
/Har
tclif
fe A
38
F9 C
oro
nat
ion
Ro
ad A
370
F10
Inn
er L
oo
p O
rbit
al
F11
Inn
er M
idd
le O
rbit
al
F12
Ou
ter M
idd
le O
rbit
al
F13
No
rth
ern
Lo
op
Orb
ital
F14
Ou
ter R
ing
Orb
ital
Q1
Wes
tbu
ry Q
uie
tway
Q2
Co
nco
rde
Qu
ietw
ay
Q3
Fro
me
Qu
ietw
ay
Q4
Bri
sto
l Bat
h R
ailw
ay P
ath
Q5
Wes
ley
Qu
ietw
ay
Q6
Wh
itch
urc
h Q
uie
tway
Q7
Mal
ago
Qu
ietw
ay
Q8
Fest
ival
Qu
ietw
ay
Q9
Pill
Qu
ietw
ay
Q10
Pro
men
ade
Qu
ietw
ay
Q11
No
th F
rin
ge
Qu
ietw
ay
Q12
Yat
e Q
uie
tway
Q13
Kn
ow
le Q
uie
tway
Q14
St
An
ne’
s Q
uie
tway
Q15
Pu
rdo
wn
Qu
ietw
ay
Q16
Try
m Q
uie
tway
F10
Cabo
tCi
rcus
Cent
reO
ldM
arke
t
Tem
ple
Mea
ds
City
of B
risto
lCo
llege
Ash
ton
Sout
hvill
e
Uni
vers
ity
Hot
wel
ls
Jam
esBa
rton
Fr5
Q4
F6
F8 Q7
Q13
F7 Q10
F4
F3
Q3
F2
F1
Q1
F9
Q8
How
will
thi
s be
del
iver
ed
• Se
ekin
g an
d pr
ioritisi
ng inv
estm
ent
• En
suring
pro
tect
ion
and
enha
ncem
ent th
roug
h th
e sp
atia
l pl
anni
ng p
roce
ss
• Us
ing
fund
ing
from
dev
elop
men
t
(Sec
tion
106
agr
eem
ents
)
• Da
y to
day
mai
nten
ance
and
im
prov
emen
t of
hig
hway
s
Fre
eway
s: d
irec
t an
d c
on
tin
uo
us
rou
tes
on
mai
n r
oad
s w
ith
ext
ensi
ve s
egre
gat
ion
Q1
0
Azt
ecW
est
Brad
ley
Stok
e
Filto
n
UW
ECa
mpu
s
St G
eorg
esPa
rkN
etha
mLo
ck
Arn
osVa
le
Bart
onH
ill
Law
renc
eH
ill
Ash
ton
Hot
wel
ls
St Wer
burg
hs
Crib
bsCa
usew
ayPa
rkw
ay
Stat
ion
Old
land
Com
mon
Dur
ley
Hill
Sout
h Br
isto
lSk
ills
Acad
emy
Hen
grov
ePa
rk
Vict
oria
Park
Cate
rPa
rk
Ash
ton
Park
Leig
hW
oods
Clift
onSu
spen
sion
Brid
ge
Pars
onSt
reet
Stat
ion
Wel
lsRo
ad
Har
ecliv
e Ro
ad
Har
tcliff
e
Tott
erdo
wn
Bish
opsw
orth
Nai
lsea
Emer
son
Gre
en
Avon
Val
ley
Han
ham
Keyn
sham
Bris
lingt
on
Whi
tchu
rch
Bath
Bris
tol
Scie
nce
Park
Ham
broo
k
Yate
Sout
hmea
dH
ospi
tal
Wes
tbur
yon
-Try
mBl
aise
Esta
teSy
lvan
Way
Bren
try
Hen
bury
Lock
leaz
e
East
ville
St P
auls
Gre
enba
nk
Chel
tenh
amRo
ad
Bris
tol
City
Cen
tre
Clift
onD
own
Sea
Mill
s
Hor
field
Shire
ham
pton
Avon
mou
th
Port
ishe
adPi
ll
Dow
nend
Stap
le H
ill
King
swoo
d
Man
gots
field
War
mle
y
Bedm
inst
er
NO
RTH
SO
MER
SET
Fifteen minute cycle
SOU
TH G
LOU
CEST
ERSH
IRE
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10
F11
F12
F13
F14
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q1
0
Q11
Q12
Q1
3
Q1
4
Q1
5
Q1
6
F1
F1
F1
F2 F2
F2
F3 F3 F3
F4
F4
F4
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
F14
Q1Q1
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q3
Q2
F5F5
F5
F6
F6
F7
F8
F8
F8
F9
F9
F1
F4 F5 F6
F7
F2
F3
Q1
Q3
Q4
Q7
F9
Q8
Q13
Q4
Q10
Q7
Q7
Q6
Q6
F12
Q13
F11
F11
F11
F11
F12
F12
Q5
Q8
Q9
F13
F13
F13 F13
Q14
Q16
Q16
Q15
Q11
Q11
Q11
Q12
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q4
F10
F10
The
Port
way
Wh
itel
adie
s/W
estb
ury
Ro
ad A
4018
Glo
uce
ster
Ro
ad A
38
Fish
po
nd
s/St
aple
ton
Ro
ad A
432
F5 T
wo
Mile
Hill
A42
0
F6 B
ath
Ro
ad A
4
F7 W
ells
Ro
ad A
37
F8 B
ish
op
wo
rth
/Har
tclif
fe A
38
F9 C
oro
nat
ion
Ro
ad A
370
F10
Inn
er L
oo
p O
rbit
al
F11
Inn
er M
idd
le O
rbit
al
F12
Ou
ter M
idd
le O
rbit
al
F13
No
rth
ern
Lo
op
Orb
ital
F14
Ou
ter R
ing
Orb
ital
Do
wn
s W
ay
Co
nco
rde
Way
Fro
me
Gre
enw
ay
Bri
sto
l Bat
h R
ailw
ay P
ath
Wes
ley
Qu
ietw
ay
Wh
itch
urc
h R
ailw
ay P
ath
Mal
ago
Gre
enw
ay
Fest
ival
Way
Pill
Path
– R
iver
Avo
n T
rail
Riv
er A
von
Tra
il
No
rth
Fri
ng
e Q
uie
tway
Yate
Qu
ietw
ay
Kn
owle
Qu
ietw
ay
St A
nn
e’s
Qu
ietw
ay
Purd
ow
n Q
uie
tway
Trym
Qu
ietw
ay
F1 F2 F3 F4 Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q1
0
Q1
1
Q1
2
Q1
3
Q1
4
Q1
5
Q1
6
F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F14
F13
F12
F11
F10
F7
F8
Cabo
tCi
rcus
Cent
reO
ldM
arke
t
Tem
ple
Mea
ds
City
of B
risto
lCo
llege
Ash
ton
Sout
hvill
e
Uni
vers
ity
Hot
wel
ls
Jam
esBa
rton
Q1
0
Qu
ietw
ays:
ple
asan
t an
d w
ell
sig
ned
tr
affi
c fr
ee o
r lo
w t
raff
ic r
ou
tes
Fig
3.2
‘Tu
be
map
’ of
net
wo
rk in
Gre
ater
Bri
sto
l
Cre
dit:
Bri
sto
l Cyc
ling
Cam
pai
gn
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
14 December 2014
Consider target users and trip purpose3.15The experience and journey purpose of different cycle users influences their ability (and willingness) to ride in different traffic conditions, to tolerate trade-offs of directness for attractiveness, and to deal with junctions and gradients. This can help with identifying the type of provision required on each route, including:
• acceptable traffic volumes and speeds
• route capacity and widths
• cycling design speed
• segregation or integration with pedestrians on traffic free routes
• lighting requirements
• cycle parking requirements
3.16The network plan should define, as far as possible, the target users and main trip purposes for each main and secondary route. This will be evident from the journey attractors served. The aim should be to provide routes that are attractive to both the less experienced cycle user and the more confident cyclist.
3.17Access routes should be appropriate for all target users and trip purposes.
Cycle use targets3.17While not an essential stage in cycle network development, developing cycle usage targets early in the network planning process is useful to define the role of the cycle network in the transport system, influence route design and cycle parking standards for new developments, and to help justify appropriate levels of investment.
3.18Targets are mainly relevant to designs in urban areas and urban fringe where, to deliver adequate capacity, designs may need to include widths, signal green times and cycle parking standards that exceed typical minimum levels.
3.19The methodology for selecting cycle usage targets can include:
• policy objectives: cycling mode share needed to address policy drivers such as congestion, air quality, physical activity targets and quality of life objectives
• benchmarking against existing and target cycling levels in similar settlements in countries with established cycling cultures
• benchmarking against existing cycling levels and cycling usage trends in different parts of the network plan area. UK cities can have significantly different cycling levels in different neighbourhoods due to urban density, availability of alternative transport options and parking, the character of the road network and existing cycling provision, the presence of a transport hub or major employer(s), topography, and demographic factors
Designs should include the full range of cyclists and cycles
-
15December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
• census data which can reveal the distribution of existing cycling levels (for journeys to work) and the potential market for cycling in an area if a network were to capture short trips that are currently being made by car (see preceding section)
• cycle user and non-user surveys
3.20Modelling of cycle usage has been used for more than 20 years in some northern European situations to help define cycle network budgets and route capacity. There have been recent calls in the UK to more accurately define the conditions which influence mode choice and assignment in UK situations.
4. Stage 2: Define route alignment and concept design
Identification of route optionsReview existing cycle network and other available route options4.1Once the schematic network has been defined, all potential route alignments that could serve each link should be identified, including:
• the existing cycle network (on-road and off-road links)
• other existing roads
• potential new traffic free routes through vehicle restricted areas, along green corridors or public open space. This should include locations where cycling has historically been prohibited
• new routes through proposed land use developments
• cycling provision within new transport corridors
4.2Many existing cycle networks have been implemented over many years against a background of changing land use, design best practice and a growth in cycling. The review of the existing cycling network should include assessment of:
• whether each existing route adequately provides its required function in the network (as defined in the previous section), taking into account projected land use developments, network hierarchy and capacity considerations
• assessment of work needed to bring a route up to current design best practice and to cater for projected growth in cycle usage
4.3Assessment of existing routes and new/alternative alignments can draw on assessment tools, such as those in the draft London Cycling Design Standards 20141 and Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 draft Design Guidance2
1 London Cycling Design Standards draft for consultation, Transport for London, June 2014
2 Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 draft Design Guidance, Welsh Government, May 2014
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
16 December 2014
4.4Input from existing cycle users is very useful in identifying deficiencies with existing cycling provision, alternative route options, and problems that, with treatment, can significantly improve a route. It is also important for designers to cycle existing and potential routes under different conditions to experience the level of service and to identify design details.
Identify barriers to cycling within the network4.5In parallel to identification of route options, the network plan should identify existing barriers and deterrents (physical and perceived) to cycling. Such barriers to cycling can include:
• river, canals, railways and some major roads that physically separate parts of the network. Crossings of these features commonly funnel traffic onto a limited number of locations that can be intimidating for cycle users
• other busy or fast roads and junctions that deter users
• pedestrianised areas, parks and footpaths where cycling is prohibited
• one-way roads
• casualty sites or perceived high risk sites
• sites associated with personal security concerns
• steep topography
4.6Early identification of these constraints will help define issues that need to be resolved (or at worst avoided) by the network design. Identification of potential solutions to overcome the barrier effect will inform the next stage: selection of preferred route alignment.
Selection of preferred route alignment 4.5The suitability of each link, modified if required, to cater for the needs of the identified target users should be considered against the five criteria: coherence, directness, safety, comfort and attractiveness. The adaptability of the link to accommodate significant increases in cycle use should also be reviewed. Table 4.1 describes key requirements under each criterion.
4.6Input from existing cyclists is very valuable in identifying the existing route option(s) that conveniently provide(s) access to destinations and balances directness, topography, traffic conditions, personal security and comfort. The local knowledge of existing cycle users, including less confident cyclists and those with children who cycle, which has been built up over many hundreds of trips can identify how different routes meet the needs of different target cycle users and at different times of day.
-
17December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
Table 4.1 Core criteria for routes used by cyclists
Coherence• link all potential origins and destinations
• be continuous and recognisable
• offer consistent standard of protection throughout
• be properly signed
• include well located cycle parking
Directness• be based on desire lines
• result in minimal detours or delays
• provide a positive advantage in terms of directness and priority over
motor traffic
Safety• be safe and perceived as safe
• provide personal security
• limit conflict between cyclists and pedestrians and other vehicles
Comfort• be smooth, non-slip, well maintained, drained and free of debris
• have sufficient width for the level of use
• have easy gradients
• be designed to avoid complicated manoeuvres
• enable cyclists to maintain momentum
• minimise impacts of noise, spray and headlight dazzle from other traffic
Attractiveness• be attractive and be interesting
• integrate with and complement their surroundings
• contribute to good urban design
• enhance personal security
• be well maintained
Adaptability• where substantial increases in cycling are expected, consideration should be
given to the adaptability of infrastructure to accommodate large increases
in use
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
18 December 2014
4.7Existing cycle users will also be able to identify problem locations which, if resolved, could unlock parts of the network that currently deter or pose hazards for cyclists.
4.8The selection of a preferred route will need to take into account the following considerations:
• for utility journeys, the optimum route, all other considerations being equal, will be the most direct option (shortest distance and minimum delay). Any other alignment would need to offer significant benefits in terms of safety, comfort or attractiveness to be successful
• for routes primarily intended for leisure use, attractiveness and comfort will be of higher importance
• the feasibility and cost of addressing any existing route deficiencies to cater for the needs of the identified target users, compared to alternative route options
• impact of any engineering measures required, or high levels of cycle use, on other sustainable modes (public transport and pedestrians) and essential vehicles (emergency services)
• casualty data should be used carefully in selecting a route alignment. Cycling casualties tend to be widely dispersed and casualty clusters commonly indicate routes that are heavily used by cyclists – because they are convenient. A low casualty record can indicate a location that cyclists avoid due to perceived danger. Casualty data may be helpful in identifying routes that need priority treatment to assist cyclists
• perceived safety of different options, because this can strongly influence route choice, and ultimately mode choice
• personal security, particularly for commuter routes that are likely to be used after dark
• adaptability to accommodate significant increases in cycling use
4.9Parallel provision: whilst the aim should be for a network that provides safe and convenient routes for the full range of cycling abilities, there may be some instances where, in the short term, no single route option provides the optimum balance of safety, directness, comfort and attractiveness for the needs of different users (e.g. experienced commuters and new or child cyclists). In such situations alternative routes with different characteristics may be provided in parallel for the different user groups as an interim arrangement. However, the longer term aim should be to design all routes as suitable for the full range of target users. Cycling networks can have a role in providing for the transition from inexperienced to more confident and skilled cycle users; this will be the case particularly in towns and cities where cycling levels have historically fallen to a low level.
-
19December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
Type of provision (concept design)4.10Once the preferred alignment has been chosen for a link, the appropriate type of provision for cycle users will need to be selected. Guidance on this is provided in the chapters on:
• principles and processes for cycle-friendly design (chapter 1)
• streets and roads (chapter 4)
• junctions and crossings (chapter 7)
• traffic free routes: conceptual design (chapter 5)
• traffic free routes: detailed design (chapter 6)
4.11Key considerations in selecting the appropriate provision will be:
• effectiveness of the solution to deliver the five criteria at a standard required for the target cycle user
• effects on other traffic (note that, on many routes, reducing traffic speeds or traffic volumes to assist cyclists should not be viewed as disbenefits; but instead a contribution to wider safety, health and environmental objectives)
• effects on pedestrians
• suitability at night and in adverse weather
• adaptability to cater for cycling growth
• cost (capital cost and maintenance liability)
4.12In practice, selection of route alignment and type of provision is an iterative process; the preferred alignment may need to be revised at this stage if a design solution cannot be found that provides adequate capacity or level of service for cycle users or cannot be delivered without unacceptable cost or impact on other traffic.
4.13Initial construction cost estimates should be prepared to enable comparison of the concept design options and to feed into and inform the overall network budget and programme (covered in the next section).
4.14Cost estimates can be built up quickly using standard unit costings per linear metre / per square metre / per item. Cost estimates should include appropriate contingencies to account for utilities diversions, land purchase and any other unknown requirements.
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
20 December 2014
5. Stage 3: Implementation priorities, budget and programme
Implementation approach and priorities
Introduction5.1Implementation of a comprehensive city-wide cycle network may take many years. Cycle networks in London and Copenhagen have been implemented over more than 30 years, and upgrading the networks is an ongoing process.
5.2Investment will therefore need to be prioritised where it can have greatest effect in encouraging cycling and reducing casualties. Implementation strategies commonly involve a combination of six approaches, each of which is described in the following sections:
• area-based phased implementation (ideally accompanied by targeted smarter choices interventions)
• corridor-based (typically to address provision along and across main radial routes)
• targeted investment around major attractors (rail stations, employers)
• targeted investment at key priorities to unlock barriers
• network-wide default interventions
• opportunistic delivery funded by land use development, transport schemes and routine maintenance
5.3The balance of these approaches will depend on the size of the settlement, the distribution of journey attractors (concentrated in the centre or dispersed in local centres and/or urban fringe development); the highway layout; existing cycling levels, topography and in some cases demographics and / or public health priorities.
5.4Smarter choices programmes with major employers, schools and visitor attractions may most effectively be targeted at areas receiving infrastructure investment.
Area-based phased implementation5.5Intensive area-based implementation of infrastructure measures may be used to avoid spreading limited resources too thinly across a network area. Smarter choices programmes may also be focused on the same areas to promote use of the new infrastructure. The aim will be to implement the entire network eventually (likely to be over 15 to 20 years, given current funding levels), by implementing a new area comprehensively every 3 to 5 years.
5.6This approach may be appropriate where there is very different propensity to cycle in different areas due to topography, land use patterns or demographics. The early phases will target areas where investment is likely to yield the greatest increases in cycling and/or the greatest health benefits. The priority areas are likely to be those with:
-
21December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
• high trip density (all modes) – town centre and main railway, plus dominant trip attractors (provided these are not geographic outliers)
• existing cycling levels and culture - it is easier to build on high existing usage in locations with a culture of cycling, and then to work out to neighbouring areas
• health indicators – areas with low activity and high obesity rates are likely to benefit most from increased physical activity. However, people living in these areas may have lowest propensity to cycle more
• areas with particular demographics, e.g. young mobile people without access to a car
5.7The main disadvantage of the area-based prioritisation of funding is that it does not equitably spread resources across the population geographically.
Corridor-based approach5.8A corridor-based approach is typically used to develop the main ‘spine’ routes on a network; commonly serving the radial corridors and town centre. This approach works well where there are predominantly residential areas between the main ‘spine’ corridors and these areas are already cycle-friendly and require minimal intervention.
Targeted on major attractors5.9Local cycling networks serving one or more specific large journey attractors may be a priority where there are particular car parking pressures or a culture of cycling – commonly hospitals, universities and railway stations. These networks are aimed at commuting journeys and accompanying smarter choices programmes will be important to maximise cycling uptake. The disadvantage of this approach is that it may create relatively isolated sections of network.
Network-wide default interventions5.10The following low-cost interventions, can be applied as a default measure across the highway network and will provide accessibility and advantage to cycle users with negligible impact on other vehicles.
• advanced stop lines
• cycle access at road closures
• exemption from banned turns
• contraflow cycling on one-way streets
• flush kerbs
• cycle parking
Advanced Stop Line, London
Contaflow cycling, London
Cycle parking, Brighton
Road crossing, Cramlington
River crossing, Newport
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
22 December 2014
Addenbrookes Access Road, Cambridge
Pho
to: J
on
Toy
5.11Advanced stop lines, flush kerbs and cycle parking can be introduced without the need for a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The need for TROs for other measures is expected to reduce following publication of the revised TSRGD in 2015. Costs can be further reduced if these measures are implemented as part of routine maintenance programmes.
5.12Cyclists will also benefit from network-wide 20mph limits and supporting low-cost speed reducing measures.
Key priorities to unlock barriers5.13Some targeted infrastructure projects can be disproportionately effective at unlocking barriers on the network. These can include:
• crossings of river, rail, road barriers that can provide major improvements in connectivity and journey time between otherwise isolated parts of a network
• cycle routes and parking to support development sites
• cycle routes to connect to improvements delivered by other transport infrastructure enhancements – routes to new stations; links to cycle routes created by highway or bus priority schemes
Opportunistic delivery5.14Parts of a cycling network may be delivered as part of major land use developments, public transport or highway schemes. A cycling network plan is helpful in ensuring that these schemes include high standard cycling facilities that fit with the wider cycling network and that planning officers identify opportunities for these developments to fund parts of the cycling network.
5.16It is recommended that a design brief for cycling and walking infrastructure is required for larger developments (>500 dwellings or 10,000 sq m of B1 uses) which will include:
• high quality cycling routes within the development site
• enhancement of existing cycle routes leading to and around the sites
• cycle parking standards commensurate with usage targets
5.17This is particularly useful where more than one developer is involved in developing a site.
5.18Routine asset management programmes provide an opportunity to implement and enhance parts of cycling network as described in section 7.
-
23December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
Budget5.19Budgets for delivery of the cycling network may be defined using a combination of the following:
• best practice investment per capita per annum
• available funding sources
• total network cost estimate / acceptable delivery timeframe
5.20Per capita investment rates: The Cycling England Cycling City and Towns (CCT) programme delivered a step change in investment in cycling in 18 settlements over a three to six year period, investing at rates that were comparable with the per capita spend in other European cities which have successfully increased cycle usage. Figure 5.1 shows how the CCT investment (DfT grant plus match funding) in York and in Greater Bristol (£13.33 per capita per annum in both cities) compares with other European cities that have achieved high cycling mode share. The investment rates include infrastructure and smarter choices programmes.
5.21The Mayor of London’s 2013 Vision for Cycling in London3 allocates spending at £12.50 per capita per annum on average for 13 years from 2014, with the average annual spend over the first three years at £16.50 per person.
5.22The 2013 report of the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group, ‘Get Britain Cycling’4 recommends create a cycling budget of at least £10 per person per year, increasing to £20.
Table 5.1 Comparison of cycling levels and spend
City Population Cycling
mode share
(all journeys)
Annual spend
per capita
Funding details
Basel 190,000 17% £11.23 1988-1994 over 7
years for Kanton
Basel-Stadt
Ghent 231,000 15% £7.89 1994-2000
Strasbourg 480,000 12% £9.40
Berlin 3,420,000 10% £4.14
York 184,000 10% £13.33 Cycling City +
match funding
2008-2011
Bristol 410,000 5% £13.33 Cycling City +
match funding
2008-2011
3 The Mayor’s Vision for Cycling in London - An Olympic Legacy for all Londoners, Greater London Authority, March 2013
4 Get Britain Cycling – Summary & Recommendations, All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group, April 2013
Source: A public health vision for cycling in Bristol 2010 - 2020
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
24 December 2014
Direction signing, Leighton Linslade
5.23Available funding sources will in part be determined by the priority given to cycling provision compared to other activities and responsibilities of the local authority / scheme promoter. Targets for cycling use can be helpful in defining these priorities.
5.24Budgets should cover:
• planning, design and consultation
• capital costs of network construction
• costs of supporting smarter choices programmes (education, training, promotion)
• monitoring
• maintenance, upgrade and enhancement of the cycling network
Programme5.25The implementation programme will be determined by:
• targets for cycle use
• transport plan priorities
• budget and funding cycles
6. Stage 4: Detailed design, construction & publicity
Detailed design and construction6.1Detailed design and construction considerations are described in the chapters on:
• streets and roads (chapter 4)
• traffic free routes: conceptual design (chapter 5)
• traffic free routes: detailed design (chapter 6)
• signing (chapter 11)
• cycle parking (chapter 12)
The detailed design process may identify unexpected costs, commonly around buried services, which affect the programme budget, phasing or potentially the design concept.
6.2A wayfinding strategy is an essential element of the network development. It serves both to help existing cycle users navigate and to publicise cycling as an option to car users.
-
25December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
6.3Wayfinding measures will include destination signing (including road markings), internet based and paper maps, and increasingly internet-based journey planning tools. Route branding, usually colour coded such as the Aylesbury gemstone routes, can help with route recognition and defining the network hierarchy. A key task is to define a consistent set of destinations. Further information is included in Chapter 11 and in Sustrans Technical Information Note 5: cycle network signing.
Public engagement programme6.4To maximise increases in cycle use, cycle network development should be accompanied by a smarter choices programme of investment in cycle training, publicity and promotion. This can include the following:
6.5Information:
• cycle route maps and web-based journey planners
• targeted information to schools and employers about the cycling support available
• one-to-one travel planning
• information about cycle locks, carrying luggage on bikes and what to wear
6.6Publicity:
• regular use and endorsement by high profile figures including council, public health and business leaders
• media releases (new routes, success stories)
• route launch events
• cycling related competitions and challenges
6.7Education:
• cycle training for adults and children
• cycle maintenance training
• web-based FAQs
• coordination with public health programmes and exercise on referral
6.8Support:
• free loan bikes (including folding and electric bikes)
• deals with bike shops
• support for employers (site audit, match funding and design help to deliver cycle parking, lockers/drying facilities, showers)
• employer support for cycle to work bike purchase schemes and support for free taxi home for employees in the event of urgent need
Route branding, Aylesbury
Launch event, St Neots
-
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
26 December 2014
6.9The engagement programme can be targeted on employers and places of education served by the new cycling infrastructure, particularly where the infrastructure delivery follows an area-wide or corridor-based approach or is targeted on major journey attractors. Education institutions and employers have established mechanisms for contacting the target audience(s).
6.10Engagement can be particularly effective where there are new controls on car parking, associated with a business expanding or relocating or accompanying the introduction of residents; parking or other car demand management programmes. It is likely to be cost-effective in these instances to promote and support cycling as part of a smarter choices programme that addresses other travel options; public transport, walking, car sharing and motorcycling.
6.11Community engagement with residents can be more challenging to deliver cost-effectively, because it can be harder to identify receptive audiences and maintain support. Local champions in community groups can provide a helpful starting point.
7. Stage 5: Monitor, evaluate, maintain and upgrade7.1The cycle network plan will need to adapt to information from monitoring and evaluation of early phases of the network development, which can identify important route enhancements to increase capacity or overcome route deficiencies.
7.2User feedback is a key input to the evolving plan.
7.3Significant cost savings can be achieved if the network plan informs an authority’s highway asset management programme. Improvements such as widening cycle lanes, increasing the depth of advanced stop line reservoirs and implementing speed reducing measures such as removing centre lines can be delivered at minimal cost if undertaken as part of routine resurfacing or other maintenance.
7.4More details are provided in the chapters on:
• maintenance and management (chapter 15)
• monitoring and evaluation (chapter 16)
Solar powered automatic cycle counter, Swindon
-
27December 2014
Sustrans Design Manual • Chapter 2: Network planning for cyclists (2014, draft)
8. ReferencesLondon Cycling Design Standards draft for consultation, Transport for London, June 2014
Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 draft Design Guidance, Welsh Government, May 2014
The Mayor’s Vision for Cycling in London - An Olympic Legacy for all Londoners, Greater London Authority, March 2013
Get Britain Cycling – Summary & Recommendations, All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group, April 2013