Sustrans Design Manual Chapter 2 - European Commission · 2018. 12. 20. · cycle-friendly design” which contains a concise illustrated compendium of the technical guidance contained

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


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


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


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.


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


• 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


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


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


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


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.


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


• 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


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


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


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


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


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


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

Documents

Sustrans Design Manual Chapter 2 - European Commission · 2018. 12. 20. · cycle-friendly design” which contains a concise illustrated compendium of the technical guidance contained