Newcastle cdt day 1 as delivered

DESIGNING FOR CYCLING BRIAN DEEGAN + JOHN DALES
Brian Deegan + John Dales
Designing for Cycling

Course Outline
Session 1 – Case, context, conditions and design. 31st October 2016
In the first session we will distil all the influences that go towards designing a
cycle route in specific street contexts. We will also cover applying the Manual for
Streets principles to cycle route design and using the Cycling Level of Service
(CLoS) and Junction Assessment tools. In addition to lectures, session one will
also include the following hands-on exercises to encourage participants to apply
the learning; CLoS/ JAT/ network porosity/ space for cycling profile.

Session 2 – Junctions, modelling and impact. 14th November 2016
The aim of the second session is to familiarise delegates with standard highway
layouts for junctions and the principles underpinning the regulations for the use of
signs and markings. We will also cover how to use modelling software to make a
case for cycling. Exercises for session two include: Junction Layouts/ Degree of
Saturation/ method of control/ assignment models
0
20 25 30 35 40
%ofjourneys
Journey time distribution
Course Outline

Session 3 – Trial, balance, visualising and communication. 28th November 2016
In session three we will explain the trial methodologies used for innovations in link
and junction design and how on-street trials should be structured. We will also
cover quantifying and balancing health, safety and congestion benefits and how to
visualise and ‘sell’ your concept. Exercises will include: visualisation / collision
analysis / HEAT Tool / Value of Time.
Course Outline

Presenting & Reviewing your Project. tbc
Each delegate will present their ideas for review and feedback.
Course Outline

Session 1 Agenda
12:30 Registration
13:00 Principles
13:20 Making the Case
13:30 Street Contexts
exercise
14:15 Assessing Existing Conditions
exercise
15:00 Break
15:15 Network Planning
15:30 Link Design
16:45 Introducing your Project
17:00 Finish

Heading
Principles

Heading
1. Cycling is now mass transport and must be treated as such

Heading
2. Facilities must be designed for larger numbers of users

Heading
3. Bicycles must be treated as vehicles, not as pedestrians

Heading
4. Cyclists need space separated from volume motor traffic

Heading
5. Where permanent segregation is not possible, ‘light’
segregation may be the answer

Heading
6. Adequate separation can be achieved using lower-traffic
streets

Heading
7. Where integration with other users is necessary, differences of
speed, volume and vehicle type should be minimised

Heading
8. Cyclist interventions need not be attempted on every road

Heading
9. Routes must flow

Heading
10. Routes must be intuitively understandable by all users

Heading
11. Provision must be consistent and routes must be planned
as a network

Heading
12. Routes and schemes must take into account how users
actually behave. If they do not, they will be ignored

Heading
13. Many of the standard tools used to manage cyclists’
interactions with others do not work

Heading
14. Changes in road space can influence modal choice

Heading
15. Trials can help achieve change

Heading
16. Avoid over-complication and the “materials trap”

Heading
17. But do not be afraid of capital infrastructure

Heading
18. All designers of cycle schemes must experience streets
and roads on a bicycle

Heading
19. Maintaining a route properly is as important as building it

Heading
20. Know when to flex these principles

Heading
Making the Case

Heading
What we need to do
Increase transport options and capacity
to move more people
Reduce congestion on the roads and
public transport network
Cycling is a major mover of people
Cycling is an efficient use of road space
Reduce the burden on the NHS
Cycling makes you healthier and
happier and saves money for the NHS
Support business and invest in areas of
high return
Cycling supports and attracts business
growth and UK productivity
Reduce harmful emissions
Cycling reduces air and noise pollution
and creates ‘better places’
Why cycling?
Prioritise spending to invest in the most
efficient schemes
Cycling BCRs are excellent
London’s population is growing
The transport network is becoming
overstretched
People are living longer but unhealthier
lives
The UK economy needs to continue to
recover and grow
Climate change threatens the
environment and our way of life
Economic Challenge
Reduced funding for public services

Heading
Wider rationale and support for cycling
Case study: DfT Case study: The AA
• Reviewed nationwide benefits of
cycling
• The UK’s leading motoring
organisation, says:
“The ‘us versus them’ mentality of
motorists and cyclists has to end.
Increased spending on cycling
infrastructure will not be to the
detriment of other road users. The
benefits can work both ways. If you
get more people cycling that means
potentially less traffic congestion,”
Edmond King, the AA

Heading
Cycling is an efficient use of road space
• Bikes take up one fifth the amount of road space
as a car
• Average car or van occupancy is 1.56, meaning
that the average cycle trip is over three times more
space efficient per person than each car trip
• The network will need to move even more people
as population increases
• Vehicles spend over 80% of their time parked,
taking up valuable city space
• Cycle parking is highly space efficient, with one
on-street car space able to accommodate up to
10-12 bicycles.

Heading
Cycling creates better places for business
• London’s streets:
 provide 80% of the Capital’s public
space, but also...
 support 80% of all trips, including 90%
of freight trips
• Many of the improvements made for
cyclists make streets more pleasant for
all, by reducing the speed of traffic,
making it safer to cross the road and
reducing noise and pollution.
• In high street locations such as Bromley
North and Long Acre (Westminster),
public space improvements have seen
higher footfall and a wider range of
activities, such as sitting in cafés.
“I believe that cycling is a
fundamental part of the future
city and has been a critical
factor in Google's decision to
invest in ...London itself.”
Dan Cobley, Managing Director
Google UK

Heading
Cycling for the ‘public health’ economy
Active Travel helps people live longer, better lives and saves NHS costs
“I don't think it's any
exaggeration to say that the
health of millions of our fellow
citizens ... and the economic
prosperity of Britain all now
depend on a radical upgrade in
prevention and public health.”
Simon Stevens, NHS Chief
Executive
• Only 20% of Londoners achieve the 150 minutes per week of
physical exercise recommended by the UK Chief Medical Officers -
but 60% of Londoners would achieve this if they made their existing
shorter daily journeys by walking and cycling.
• The World Health Organisation’s Health
Economic Assessment Tool indicates that
the health benefits of a 400% growth in
cycling in London would result in a
financial benefit of £248m per year from
reduced mortality alone .
• The expenditure in TfL’s Cycling Vision
Business Case is ‘covered’ by these
monetised health benefits alone.

Heading
Street Contexts

Streets + Roads

Street Life
Street Party
The word on the street
Streetwise
High street
On my street
Streets paved with gold
Streets ahead
“On the street where you live”
Road-kill
Road Rage
The rules of the road
Roadworks
Main road
Up the road
Roads full of pot-holes
Road to nowhere
“On the road again”
Streets + Roads

Manual for Streets (2007)
• “A clear distinction can be drawn between
streets and roads.
• Roads are essentially highways whose
main function is accommodating the
movement of motor traffic.
• Streets are typically lined with buildings
and public spaces, and while movement is
still a key function, there are several
others, of which the place function is the
most important.”
Streets + Roads

Motorway
High Street
Residential Street
Rural Lane
Place Status
MovementStatus
Movement + Place

Movement + Place

• Streets have to accommodate both Movement and Place
• Design decisions will need to find the best balance
• Some streets are more important for Movement than others
• In any street, some types of Movement will be more
important than others
• How do you assess Place status?
• As a Place, your local high street may be more important to
you than Trafalgar Square
• So, what does ‘Place’ mean here?
• You’ll have to ask.
Movement + Place

Better Streets (Mayor of London, 2009)
Some Guiding Principles:
• Understand function
• Imagine a blank canvas
• Decide the degree of separation
• Reflect character
• Go for quality
• Avoid over-elaboration
Street Design Principles

Understand function

Imagine a blank canvas

Decide the degree of separationDecide the degree of separation

Decide the degree of separation

Distinctive PlaceAny Place
Reflect character

The Street is the Stage, not the Star
Reflect character

Factors to consider:
• Consistent
• Well designed
• Well executed
• Timeless
• Durable
Go for quality

Go for quality
Factors to consider:
• Consistent
• Well designed
• Well executed
• Timeless
• Durable

Avoid over-elaboration

“Have nothing in your houses
which you do not know to be
useful or believe to be beautiful”
William Morris
streets
Street Design Principles

What do the Manuals for Streets say about cycling?
Not a lot Not much more

“This is simply the best UK urban
design manual of the 21st century’’
Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers, vol 161:
Urban Design and Planning, March 2008
But we need to understand the principles

• Applicable to Trunk Roads
• Highways England standard
• Very detailed – covers
• Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
• Carriageway widths
• Design Speeds
• Junction geometry/detailing
• Checking and audit procedures
• Not appropriate for city streets
DMRB – National Guidance for Roads

LCDS – Cycling facilities by RTF street type

Segregation no longer dictated by
motor vehicle flow and speed
Depends on street type / place
characteristics / intensity of uses
Deciding on the type of cycling facility

Exercise

Width and Profile Decisions – 7m

DESIGNING FOR CYCLING BRIAN DEEGAN + JOHN DALESDESIGNING FOR CYCLING BRIAN DEEGAN + JOHN DALES
Assessing Existing Conditions

Cycling Level of Service

0
100
70
40
Dutch
Danish
German
UK
Cycling Infrastructure Performance Scale

• Critical Flags an issue that should be resolved or mitigated
for in order to ensure the safety of cyclists
• Basic (<40%) Suitable for some existing cyclists
• Good (40 – 70%) Suitable for most existing and at higher
levels has some enticement effect
• Highest (>70%) Suitable for all cyclists of every age/ability
BASIC GOOD HIGHEST

IHT – Cycle Audit/Review
• 1996
• Objective
• Lessons have been learnt since
e.g. danger of 3-4m c/way width

Professor John Parkin - RISK
• Confirms IHT Cycle Review
methodology to be robust
• Loss of aide memoire aspect
through focus on one indicator
“This finding provides, for the first
time, objective evidence to support
the use of the IHT method.”

LCC - Go Dutch Matrix
• What is important to
current cyclists
• Difficult to measure, as
subjective elements are
not defined

CLoS measures ride quality
Outcomes
Coherence
Safety
Directness
Comfort
Attractiveness
Adaptability
Factors Indicators
What are the key
influencing factors
on each design
outcome?
What can I look for
that would show me
evidence of whether
a factor is being
addressed?
Score weakest point, not strongest

COHERENCE

Density of other routes based on mesh width
>400m, 250>400m, <250m

SAFETY

Collision Risk
What design choices increase the likelihood of the top five
most common conflicts?

Left Hook at Signalised Junctions
Conflicting movements, separation in time & space
0 1 2

Left Hook at Side Road Junctions
Tight junction radii, entry treatments type & quality
0 1 2

Right Hook at Junctions
Single lane duelling, presence of right turn pocket or side
road entry treatment
0 1 2

Collision alongside or from behind
Nearside lane width primary concern, cycle lane secondary
0 1 2

Kerbside activity (bus stops, parking loading) or
collision with open door
Cycle lane width if present and proximity to parking/loading
0 1 2

Other vehicle fails to give way or disobeys signals
Clear priority and visibility
0 1 2

Feeling of Safety
TfL, Attitudes to Cycling

Separation from heavy traffic
If heavy traffic present then what type of segregation?
None; light; full
0 1 2

(If not segregated) Speed of traffic
85%ile speed: >30; >25; 20-25; <20
0 1 2

(If not segregated) Volume of traffic
Two way flow:
>1000; 500-1000 (>5% HGV); 200-500 (<2% HGV); <200
0 1 2

Interaction with heavy traffic (HGVs and buses)
Some; occasional; frequent
0 1 2

Risk/fear of crime
Open design; well maintained; pleasant interaction
0 1 2

Lighting
Not lit; few stretched of darkness; lit thoroughly
0 1 2

Isolation
Far from activity; closer to activity; always overlooked
0 1 2

Highway environment behaviour
Encourages aggression; controls behaviour; encourages
civilised behaviour
0 1 2

DIRECTNESS

Deviation of route
Type of route Length Straight line Deviation
CS1 8.58km 8.44km 1.66%
CS2 7.68km 6.13km 25.29%
CS3 12.72km 11.70km 8.72%
CS4 13.87km 11.09km 25.07%
CS5 8.62km 7.32km 17.76%
CS6 11.85km 9.73km 21.79%
CS7 12.48km 11.60km 7.59%
CS8 7.82km 6.27km 24.72%
CS9 16.76km 15.39km 8.90%
CS10 11.29km 9.62km 17.36%
CS11 6.43km 4.86km 32.30%
CS12 6.87km 5.86km 17.24%
Average deviation 17.36%
QWA 6.41km 5.10km 25.69%
QWB 7.60km 6.30km 20.63%
QWC 6.03km 6.38km 10.19%
QWD 6.98km 5.10km 36.86%
QWE 5.33km 4.54km 17.40%
QWF 8.72km 5.3km 64.53%
QWG 9.28km 6.55km 41.68%
QWH 4.78km 3.99km 19.80%
Average deviation 27.63%
40%, 20-40%, <20%

COMFORT

Clear nearside space in secondary position or motor
vehicle speed/volume in primary position
Secondary: 1.5m
Primary: medium motor
vehicle flow
Secondary: 1.5-2.0m
Primary: low motor
vehicle flow
Secondary: >2.0m
Primary: no
overtaking
0 1 2

ATTRACTIVENESS

PPMM = pedestrians
per metre of clear
footway width per min
PPMM = people per
hour ÷ 60 ÷ clear
footway width in mtrs
Comfort levels

PM10 & NOX values referenced from maps or
London air app
PM10 range
>40, 22-40,<22 micro g/m3
NOX range
>40, 22-40,<22 micro g/m3
0 1 2

ADAPTABILITY

Route matches predicted usage and has
exceedence built into the design
0 1 2
Provision struggles to
cope with existing
cycling demand which
could lead to conflict
with other modes
Provision is matched to
predicted demand flows
Provision has spare
capacity for large
increases in
predicted cycle use

Scoring example
Existing
Scheme name Existing score Consultation
option
Blackfriars Road 37% 86%
Proposed

Junction Assessment Tool

Break

Network Planning

Step 1: Review Existing Conditions

Step 2: Mesh Density Analysis

Mesh density example

Step 3: Classification Audit

Step 4: Area Porosity Analysis

Step 5:

Option 1: Filtered Permeability Area Treatment

Option 2: Network Delivery Route Treatment

Link Design

Cycling facilities by RTF ‘Street-type’

DEGREES OF SEPARATION

1. ‘Shared Space’

2. Mixed traffic

3. Cycle street

4. Advisory cycle lane

5. Shared bus / cycle lane

6. Mandatory cycle lane

7. ‘Light’ segregated lane

Light Segregation Rating
Protection: How protected do cyclists
feel and what is the expected level of
encroachment.
Installation cost: How much does the
treatment cost per km
Durability: How well does the treatment
stand up to general traffic impacts
Aesthetics: How well does the
treatment blend with a quality street
approach
Protection Cost
Durability Aesthetics
Protection Cost
Protection Cost

a. Buffer lane with studs
Protection Cost

b. Wands
Protection Cost

c. Turtles
Protection Cost

d. Lacasitos (Tobys)
Protection Cost

e. Armadillos
Protection Cost

f. Orcas
Protection Cost

g. Hedgehogs
Protection Cost

h. Floating parking
Protection Cost

i. Barriers
Protection Cost

j. Planters
Protection Cost

k. Rigid bollards
Protection Cost

l. Modular kerbs
Protection Cost

m. Defenders
Protection Cost

n. Minorcas
Protection Cost

8. Fully segregated track / lane

9. Shared use area (why it’s got a bad name)

9. Shared use area (Why it works in the right context)

10. Shared use path

11. Shared use area with suggested route

12. Separated path

13. Stepped track

14. Dedicated cycle track

CYCLE-FRIENDLY TRAFFIC CALMING
1. Cycle-friendliness rating
2. Vertical traffic calming
3. Horizontal traffic calming
4. Enforcement based traffic calming
5. Psychological traffic calming

1. Cycle-friendliness rating
Safe: Does the treatment put cyclists into
conflict with motor vehicles or pedestrians?
Direct: Does the treatment make cyclists take
long detours?
Comfort: Does the treatment use materials that
are difficult to ride over?
Coherent: Does the treatment obscure route
clarity?
Attractive: Does the treatment improve the
quality of the area
Adaptable: Is the treatment easy to adjust and
adapt to increasing numbers of cyclists?
NB: Not a measure of speed reduction effectiveness
Safe Direct Comfortable
Attractive Coherent Adaptable

a. Sinusoidal road humps

b. Round-top road humps

c. Raised table

d. Side road entry treatment

e. Rumble strips

f. Speed cushions

a. Median Strip

b. Pinch point

c. Chicanes

d. Horizontal lane deflection

e. Point closures

f. Objects

g. Floating parking

h. Build-outs

i. Parking

j. Tight radii

k. Implied Roundabouts

4. Enforcement-based traffic calming

a. Signage and roundels

b. Speed/average speed cameras

c. Signal Progression

d. Interactive signs

5. Psychological traffic calming

a. Priority change

b. Active frontage

c. Street trees

d. Visual narrowing

e. Gateways

f. Greening

g. Homezone

h. Colouring

i. Street art

j. ‘DIY street’

k. Character enhancement

l. ‘Shared Space’

m. Implied crossings

n. Centre-line removal

And the winners are...
• 1st Place: Centre line removal
• 2nd Place: Greening
• Joint 3rd Place: DIY Street & Priority Change
• Wooden spoon: Rumble strips

Your Project

Choosing a site
• 400m in length
• At least one signalised junction
• Choose something challenging (you will learn more)
• Don’t think of a solution before you have assessed it
thoroughly
• It can be a project you are working on
• It can be in a different local authority area

• Site visits should be taken during peak conditions (AM usually)
• Signal assessment will take 30mins to 1 hour
• Traffic counts should be for at least 15mins
• Observations and photos are crucial
• Pick up key information for the level of service (next session)
• What does the street feel like?
• How are people crossing the road?
• Are drivers being aggressive?
• Do people look confused?
• Is it well kept?
• What are the people like?
• How are people choosing to travel?
• Are cyclists behaving aggressively?
• What is the potential for conflict?
Assessing existing condition

Gathering data
• Traffic counts for all modes in all directions at your chosen signal
junction (on site 15minute count, x4 for hourly count x10 for
approximation of AADTF)
• Signal timings ( from on site observation or timing sheets)
• Pedestrian counts (pen and paper, tally in 5’s or 10’s if busy)
• Pedestrian comfort (pedestrians per metre per minute)
• Collision data 3 years within 50m buffer of your link and junction
(London Collision Map)
• Traffic speed data (set a distance get a stopwatch)
• Air Quality (clean air London website or app)
• Noise (generated from traffic data)
• Degree of saturation (pen, paper and stopwatch)
• Gradient (smartphone and calculator)
• All the data you need is either easy to get on site or freely available

Newcastle cdt day 1 as delivered

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Newcastle cdt day 1 as delivered

Similar to Newcastle cdt day 1 as delivered (20)

More from Northumbria University

More from Northumbria University (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Newcastle cdt day 1 as delivered