Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Guide to
Bicycles
STANDARDS AUSTRAUA
Traffic Engineering Practice
H
AUSTROADS
4t*
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Part 14 - Bicycles
Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice
Austroads is the association of Australian and New Zealand road transport and traffic authorities whose mission is to
contribute to development and delivery of the Australasian transport vision by:
supporting safe and effective management and use of the road system
providing professional advice to member organisations and national and international bodies
Within this ambit, Austroads aims to provide strategic direction for the integrated development, management and
operation of the Australian and New Zealand road system - through the promotion of national uniformity and har-
mony, elimination of unnecessary duplication and the identification and application of world best practice.
Austroads membership comprises the six Australian State and two Territory road transport and traffic authorities, the
Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Development, the Australian Local Government Association
and Transit New Zealand.
The success of Austroads is derived from the synergies of interest and participation of member organisations and
others in the road industry.
Member Authorities
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Austroads
Sydney 1999
Part 14 - Bicycles
Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice
First Edition 1993
Technical Writer
Mr Gary Veith, Roads Corporation, Victoria
Figures
Ms Gayle Buckby, Dorrestyn & Co Pty Ltd
Bright Tiger Design
Reproduction of extracts from this publication may be made subject to due acknowledgment of the source.
Although this publication is believed to be correct at the time of printing, AUSTROADS does not accept any responsibility for any
consequences arising from the use of information contained in it. People using the information should apply, and rely upon, their
own skill and judgement to the particular issue which they are considering.
In December 1993 Austroads and Standards Australia signed a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the development of
Standards and related documents primarily for the development and management of the Australian road system. Standards Australia's
support for this handbook reflects the co-operative arrangement between the two organisations to ensure there is a coordinated
approach in this area.
STANDARDS AUSTRALIA
V
AUSTROADS works towards uniformity of practice in respect of design, construction and user aspects
of roads and bridges and with this purpose in view, publishes guides and general procedures.
Traffic Engineering Practice, first published in 1965,is a practical guide to traffic engineering for high-
way and transport engineers in Road Authorities, Local Government and engineering consultants, and
as a reference for engineering students.
The 1988 edition of the Guide was published with 10 of the then intended 12 parts. The series has been
expanded to 15 parts as follows:
8
9 Arterial Road Traffic Management
10 Local Area Traffic Management
D
11 Parking
12 Roadway Lighting
13 Pedestrians
14 Bicycles
15 Motorcycles
The information contained in the various Parts is intended to be used as a guide to good practice.
Discretion and judgement should be exercised in the light of many factors which may influence the
choice of traffic engineering treatment in any given situation.
These guidelines make reference where relevant to current Australian Standards and are intended to sup-
plement and otherwise assist in their interpretation and application.
Part 14 focuses on technical aspects of designing roads and paths for safe and efficient cycling. This
edition of the guide replaces the AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Part 14 - Bicycles
(1993) and incorporates the latest practice throughout Australia with respect to transportation by bicycle.
The new publication has been prepared after extensive consultation with Australian States and
Territories, New Zealand and other interested groups and stresses the importance of developing com-
plementary bicycle strategies at all levels of government.
Guidelines are provided on the choice of bicycle facility, the design of road/path intersections, traffic
control devices, bicycle parking requirements, pavement design, provision for bicycles at structures and
`end of trip' facilities. The guide also discusses the characteristics required of a road and path network
and the desirability of encouraging multi mode travel.
Due to variations in `bicycle' legislation across Australia and New Zealand, readers are encouraged to
refer to the appropriate road authority for confirmation of design details.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Table of Contents
Glossary of Terms
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
4. Roads .............................................................................................................................. 16
4.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 16
4.2. Road Design Criteria for Cyclists ...................................................................................... 16
4.2.1. Road Geometry ..................................................................................................... 16
4.2.2. Gradients ............................................................................................................... 16
4.2.3. Cross Section & Clearances ................................................................................. 16
4.2.4. Capacity ................................................................................................................ 17
4.2.5. Speed Issues .......................................................................................................... 17
4.2.6. Public Lighting ..................................................................................................... 17
4.3. Provision for Cyclists ......................................................................................................... 17
4.3.1. General ................................................................................................................. 17
4.3.2. Finding Space for Treatment ................................................................................ 19
4.4. Road Treatments for Cyclists ............................................................................................. 20
4.4.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes ........................................................................................ 20
4.4.2. Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes ................................................................................... 23
4.4.3. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes .................................................................................. 27
4.4.4. Sealed Shoulders ................................................................................................... 28
4.4.5. Protected Two-Way Lanes ..................................................................................... 29
4.4.6. Advisory Treatments .............................................................................................. 30
4.4.7. Wide Kerbside Lanes ............................................................................................ 31
4.4.8. Bus/Bicycle Lanes ................................................................................................. 34
4.5. Supplementary Road Treatments ....................................................................................... 34
4.5.1. Curves & Turns ..................................................................................................... 34
4.5.2. Lane Channelisation ............................................................................................. 35
4.5.3. Ramps .................................................................................................................... 36
4.6. Provision for Cyclists on Freeways .................................................................................... 37
4.6.1. General ................................................................................................................. 37
4.6.2. Suitability for Use ................................................................................................. 37
4.6.3. Treatments at Interchanges ................................................................................... 38
4.7. Local Area Traffic Management Schemes ......................................................................... 41
5. Road Intersections ............................................................................................................ 47
5.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 47
5.2. Issues at Intersections for Cyclists ..................................................................................... 47
5.2.1. General ................................................................................................................. 47
5.2.2. Process to Evaluate Conflict for Cyclists ............................................................. 48
5.3. Typical Intersections Details .............................................................................................. 49
5.3.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes ........................................................................................ 49
5.3.2. Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes ................................................................................... 49
5.3.3. Wide Kerbside Lanes ............................................................................................ 49
5.3.4. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes .................................................................................. 50
5.3.5. Protected Two-Way lanes ...................................................................................... 50
5.3.6. Shared Traffic Lanes ............................................................................................. 51
5.4. Signalised Intersections ...................................................................................................... 51
5.4.1. Bicycle Detection At Traffic Signals ..................................................................... 51
5.4.2. Signalised Intersection Treatments ....................................................................... 53
5.4.3. Phase Times .......................................................................................................... 60
5.5. Unsignalised Intersections .................................................................................................. 61
5.5.1. Left Turn Slip Lanes .............................................................................................. 61
5.5.2. Roundabouts ......................................................................................................... 63
5.5.3. Service Road Treatments ....................................................................................... 68
6. Paths .............................................................................................................................. 69
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Absolute Minimum: A dimension below which the treatment cannot be used under any circumstances.
Acceptable Maximum: A dimension that is at the upper limit of acceptable dimensions and above
which the treatment can only be used in certain conditions and which may be associated with certain
precautions e.g. signage.
Acceptable Minimum: A dimension that is at the lower limit of acceptable dimensions and below
which the treatment can only be used in certain conditions and which may be associated with certain
precautions e.g. signage.
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT): The total annual traffic volume in both directions at a road
location, divided by the number of days in the year (applicable to motor traffic unless noted otherwise).
Arterial Road: A road with a prime function to provide for major regional and inter-regional traffic
movements.
Batter: Embankment at the side of and sloping to or from a path or road (sect. 7.6.2).
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Bicycle: In this guide, the discussions relating to vehicle and rider characteristics generally assume a
two wheeled vehicle propelled by muscular force, exerted by a rider through pedals, as distinct from say
`human powered vehicles', which whilst accommodated in recommendations throughout the guide, are
treated in detail but separately.
However, in legislation a bicycle is defined more broadly e.g., a vehicle with 1 or more wheels that is
built to be propelled by human power through a belt, chain or gears (whether or not it has an auxiliary
motor), and includes a pedicab, penny-farthing and unicycle; but not a wheelchair, wheeled toy, or any
vehicle with an auxiliary motor capable of generating a power output over 200 watts.
Bicycle/Car Parking Lane: A lane combination used on roads where one section is designated for the
exclusive use of cyclists and the other for motor-vehicle parking (sect. 4.4.2).
Bicycle Path: A path or path section intended for the exclusive use of cyclists, generally referred to in
this document as an exclusive bicycle path (sect. 6.6.3).
Bollard: A Path Terminal device consisting of a short post or other isolated vertical `upstand' generally
erected to prevent or guide access at a critical point (sect. 6.7.3.1(e)).
Carriageway: Area of a road reserve provided for the movement or parking of vehicles.
Collector Road: A road with a prime function to distribute traffic between arterial roads and local
streets.
Conflict Zone: In relation to intersection crossings, is that area from the point where a vehicle enters
an intersection to the last point of conflict with another legal movement of traffic (including pedestrians)
- (sect. 5.4.3(c)).
Conspicuity: In this instance, describes the degree to which cyclists are readily observed.
Containment Fence: Physical barrier sufficient to provide separation between the travelled path, or
paths used by cyclists and pedestrians, from the work area, but not so rigid as to become a hazard if
struck by vehicles, or to act as a `safety barrier'.
Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane: A bicycle lane deployed on one (left) side of a one way street serving
cyclists travelling against what is otherwise the legal direction of travel (sect. 4.4.3)
Desirable: The dimension provided in tables specifying the width of bicycle lane or path treatment
facilities, which is normally used. For new construction it would be appropriate to use this dimension.
Desire Line: Route chosen by cyclists (or other road or path users if relevant) irrespective of the
presence of a route, path or other facility.
Exclusive Bicycle Lane: A lane designated for the exclusive use of cyclists generally located at the side
of a road.
Footpath: An area open to the public that is designated for, or has as one of its main uses, use by
pedestrians, but does not include a shared use path.
Freeway: A highway for through traffic with full control of access and with grade separation at
intersections.
Full Barrier Fence: A fence provided to generally prevent access to a slope or fall which due to the
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
height of the fall, the existence of obstacles or grade of the batter, could result in injury
Gradient: The longitudinal slope of a road or path, usually represented as the ratio of a one metre
vertical rise to the horizontal distance (e.g. 1:50), or expressed as a percentage (e.g. 2%).
Groove: Narrow depression or rut in what is otherwise a relatively flat and smooth riding surface, which
could catch a bicycle wheel where it is parallel to the direction of travel. (sect. 8.5.1).
Holding Rail: A rail used by cyclists to assist them to avoid having to remove/detach their feet/shoes
from their pedals, so they can wait in a ready position (for cycling) at intersections (sect. 6.7.3.2).
Hook (Box) Turn: Where a rider approaches and enters an intersection adjacent to the left edge of a
road, until the rider is as near as practicable to the far edge of the road that the rider is entering. Then,
the rider proceeds along the entering road with a green light or otherwise after giving way to
approaching vehicles (sect. 5.4.2.4).
Human Powered Vehicles: In this instance, refers to the array of alternative forms of pedal powered
and hand cranked vehicles including recumbents, tandems, tricycles, and bicycles with trailers.
Intersection Crossing Time: The period it takes a cyclist to pass through an intersection, from the point
of entering a signalised intersection (from the stop bar) to the last point of conflict with another legal
movement of traffic (including pedestrians) - (sect. 5.4.3(c))
Journey: Relates to longer travel events such as those with a period of a day or several days.
Local Access Path: Minor path generally located in a local or residential area, that links road and/or
other path cycling routes.
Local Street: A street with a prime function to provide access to adjacent land uses.
Multi Modal Transport: Combination of bicycle travel and other modes of travel (sect. 2.5).
Nature Strip: The area between a road and adjacent land, but does not include a bicycle path, footpath
or shared path
Partial Barrier Fence: A fence provided to reduce the likelihood of access to a slope or fall which due
to the height of the fall, the existence of obstacles or grade of the batter, could result in injury
Path Terminal: A device or treatment generally used adjacent to the intersection of paths and roads
primarily to limit the possibility of path cyclists from entering a road unknowingly or at speed, or
alternatively to prevent access by unauthorised vehicles (sect. 6.7.3.1).
Pedestrian: A person walking, and including people in wheelchairs, on roller skates or riding on `toy
vehicles' such as skate boards or other vehicles, other than a bicycle, powered by human effort or a
motor and with a maximum speed of 10 km/h.
Percentile Speed: Speed at or below which the nominated percentage (e.g. 15, 50, 85) of vehicles are
observed to travel under free flow conditions.
Projection: Effectively a narrowing of the road carriageway by an adjustment in the kerb line generally
over of short distance, that may be either raised (kerbed) or constructed of pavement bars and markings,
and may consist of an island or continuous kerbing.
Road: An area that is open to or used by the public and is developed for, or has as one of its main uses,
the driving or riding of vehicles.
Road Authorities: State road authority, municipality, other body or individual responsible for the care,
control and maintenance of bicycle route infrastructure.
Road Reserve: Land comprising the road and adjoining nature strips.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Safety Barrier: A physical barrier separating the work area or paths used by cyclists and pedestrians,
from motor traffic, designed to resist penetration by an out-of-control vehicle and as far as practicable,
to redirect colliding vehicles back into the travelled path.
Safety Strip: Refer Section 9.6.1.2
Sealed Shoulder: Refers to the sealed edge of roads outside of the travelled carriageway (the shoulder)
of roads where cyclists might be expected to ride. It is delineated by an edge line applied between the
sealed shoulder and the travelled section of a carriageway. The treatment is almost invariably associated
with unkerbed roads, and is often applicable to rural roads (sect. 4.4.4).
Segregated Path: Path now referred to as a Separated Path
Separated Path: A path divided into separated sections one of which is designated for the exclusive use
of cyclists and an alternate section for other path users (sect. 6.6.2).
Shared Use Path: A path open to the public that is designated for, or has as one of its main uses, use
by both cyclists and pedestrians, but does not include a separated footpath or a footpath adjacent to a
road (sect. 6.6.1).
Speed Environment: Effectively the 85th percentile speed for a particular road or path section.
Speed Maintenance: An important `bicycle rider requirement', this term refers to that quality of routes
that permits cyclists to maintain their speed (sect. 3.4).
Squeeze Point: A narrowing in a travelled section of a path or road that may be hazardous to cyclists
who are forced to move nearer to or into an adjacent stream of traffic.
Stairway Wheeling Ramp: A stairway with a ramp beside it, preferably with a channel, along which a
bicycle can roll (sect. 7.6.1).
Step: Abrupt rise or difference in levels in the riding surface, (sect. 8.5.1).
Storage: Def 1: In relation to bicycle route facilities, refers to the space used by cyclists to wait (or
`store') or so as to enhance safety (e.g. sect. 5.4.2.3).
Storage: Def 2: In relation to bicycle parking, the terms storage or parking are similar (e.g. Table 10-3).
Strategic Bicycle Route: A route which experiences the highest level of use by cyclists, or has the
potential to do so with the implementation of a route or route network, or a route defined by a strategic
or local bicycle plan. Includes principal bicycle network routes, and arterial and collector roads.
Tidal Flow: Where traffic moves predominantly in one direction only on a two-way road (or path)
during a certain period, and in the other direction during a subsequent period.
Trip: Relates to short or regular travel events in this instance.
Wide Kerbside Lane: A motor traffic lane free of parked cars, and of sufficient width to permit cyclists
and other motor traffic to travel along a road within a lane generally located at the left side of a road,
without significant impact on each others paths. May be associated with a two-way/two-lane road or a
multi lane road (SBC 1987b) - (sect. 4.4.7).
Work Area: Specific area where maintenance or construction work is being done.
Work Site: Area that includes the work area(s) and any additional length of road or path required for
advance signing, tapers, side-tracks or other areas needed for associated purposes.
Note: The definitions in the Glossary are relevant to the discussions in this guide. Care may be required
in the use of these, as definitions vary in different documents and in traffic legislation e.g. the term
'bicycle'. In addition some of the definitions under legislation in some States differ from those in similar
legislation in other States.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
1
1 Introduction
This document is intended as a guide for road authorities, continuous routes usually on the road network. They also
engineers, planners and designers involved in the plan- seek secure parking, lockers, changing facilities, and a
ning, design and construction of cycling facilities. shower at their destination. On the other hand recreational
Guidelines are provided on the appropriate construction cyclists desire enjoyable journeys that may or may not
measures for various types of cycling facilities. It also rep- have a specific destination.
resents a comprehensive resource document on a range of
issues associated with cycling. It is intended to provide a Authorities responsible for roads have an important role to
basis for national uniformity in planning and designing for play in encouragement of bicycle travel as they produce the
bicycle use. environment in which safe, convenient and comfortable
cycling can take place. It is vital that road authorities, engi-
Bicycles are defined as vehicles under road traffic regula- neers, planners and designers understand the nature of
tions and therefore cyclists have a right to use virtually the cycling; that many commuting cyclists will prefer to use
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
entire road system. Bicycles are especially suited to trips the quickest (usually most direct) route utilising main
less than 5 km, and trips up to 20 km long are readily roads, local streets and paths as the need arises. Providing
achieved by a rider of average fitness. As most car trips lie adequate encouragement for cycling therefore requires the
within this range, the bicycle, individually and in conjunc- consideration of this mode of transport in all road planning,
tion with public transport, should play an important role in design, construction and maintenance activities. In each
reducing dependence on the motor car for trips related to town or city, a network of on-road and off-road routes
work, education, recreation, commerce and shopping. Use should be identified and improvements systematically
of the bicycle for a greater portion of commuter trips implemented to cater for the various bicycle users. It
would have a positive impact with respect to the environ- should also be understood that cyclists basically need a
ment and community health. smooth hazard-free riding environment and, where they
share roads, they need sufficient space to operate safely
The full potential of the bicycle as a mode of transport can alongside motor vehicles.
only be achieved through the development of comprehen-
sive strategies and programs involving all relevant levels of Whilst the pro-active development of a cycle network is
government, and input from cyclist user groups and other important to convenient and safe travel by bicycle, it is
relevant stakeholders. Specific Encouragement programs more important that the wider transport policies and pro-
can be provided to introduce people to recreational bicycle grams cater for cycling in an integrated manner. In order
riding and its benefits but encouragement of greater use of to maximise the role of cycling in local transport, cycling
bicycles for transport depends on the development of effec- provisions and good design will need to be included in all
tive and complementary programs in Education, transport infrastructure projects. Traffic management and
Engineering, Enforcement and Encouragement. On the parking control projects can make cycling more competi-
broadest scale bicycle riding can be encouraged by planning tive in congested urban centres. Marketing campaigns can
authorities through policies which encourage higher densi- shift consumer preferences to cycling for local trips. Land
ty urban development, ensuring bicycle access into and use planning policies also impact on travel patterns and
through all new land developments, traffic management trip lengths and thereby have a significant impact upon the
strategies which assist bicycle travel and the provision of viability of cycling as a transport mode.
satisfactory showers and parking facilities in the workplace.
2.1. The Role of Cycling in Transport continuing use of `bicycle friendly' local area traffic
management schemes and appropriate design of new
Cycling currently fulfils an important transport role within residential areas to create pleasant and safe neighbour-
communities. Surveys conducted in major Australian hood environments (Refer Australian Model Code for
cities during the 1980's have shown that cycling is popu- Residential Development);
lar and is increasing in popularity as a means of transport
and for recreation. There is relatively little data available dedication of road space to specific users (e.g. lanes for
on national bicycle usage. However, various references exclusive use by trucks, buses, car pools or bicycles);
indicate that approximately 5% of all trips are made by
bicycle and 20% of the population regularly use a bicycle cleaner, quieter and more efficient motor vehicles; and
(at least once a fortnight). Furthermore, bicycle use in home based work through the application of modern
some cities is growing by 10% per annum. It is therefore communication technologies.
essential that road authorities, engineers, planners and
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
designers determine what is needed for these road users on The management of traffic impacts on cities is likely to
all existing and proposed roads in the network and move require the use of all the above measures to some extent,
to provide necessary facilities. and a number involve cultural change and are long term
options. However, improvement in the short to medium
The efficient transportation of people and goods in cities term is likely to be achieved through implementing local
is essential if the economic and social needs of society are (street or neighbourhood) and intermediate (zone,
to be met. The modes of transport which play important precinct, corridor, regional) measures and by encouraging
roles in satisfying these needs include trucks, bicycles, people to use modes of transport other than the motor car.
trains, trams, buses, taxis, motor cycles and private motor
cars. The private motor car is the favoured mode (by the Cycling is a clean and efficient mode of transport that is
community at large) for most trips in cities. It can, howev- well suited to many of the trips currently made in cars,
er, have undesirable aspects in relation to traffic conges- particularly in inner urban areas. Many car trips, including
tion, road safety, noise and air pollution. These impacts travel to work, are less than 10 kilometres, a distance that
have led to extensive use of local area traffic management can be covered in many inner urban areas as quickly on a
schemes over the past decade and provision of noise atten- bicycle as in a car.
uation measures on major new road projects.
There is considerable potential for the bicycle to provide a
There is also an increasing realisation in communities that clean and efficient alternative mode for many current
it may not be possible or desirable to provide sufficient motor car trips. In view of community concerns about
road space to completely meet the growing demand for health, about pollution, the greenhouse effect and the envi-
travel by private motor car. Consequently, many planning, ronmental damage caused by motor vehicle emissions, the
highway and local authorities are either examining or wider use of the bicycle should be promoted as a non-pol-
implementing measures which may be used to achieve an luting form of transport.
acceptable balance between the transport and communica-
If significant numbers of people are to be encouraged to
tion needs of communities and the need to maintain or
use bicycles instead of cars they need to be convinced that
enhance the amenity of residential areas, towns and cities.
it is a reasonably safe, convenient, healthy and enjoyable
The range of measures that may be necessary in future
way to travel. Moreover they need to feel that they are per-
could include:
sonally secure. Personal security is related to many
the development of more efficient uses of transport aspects of society other than those associated with engi-
systems by gaining greater capacity from existing neering and planning, but these disciplines should also
facilities through changes to pricing policies, land use consider the personal security of cyclists in the design and
strategies, parking policies, and the like; maintenance of facilities. This may relate to the provision
of adequate lighting, maintenance of landscaping along
environmentally adapted `through' roads which may paths, direction signs and the provision of frequent exit
maintain existing traffic volumes but at a reduced points from off-road paths to the street system.
speed;
Encouragement of cycling as a means of transport also
exclusion of motor traffic from town or city centres in requires comprehensive planning and the development of
favour of pedestrian shopping precincts; complementary programs dealing with education,
PLANNING FOR CYCLISTS 3
enforcement, engineering and encouragement so that costs in the community, less traffic on our roads and clean-
people choose to cycle. er air. The goal is to double bicycle use by the year 2004.
Cycling also plays an important part in recreation within The Strategy contains deliverable objectives, with targets,
the community. It contributes to the general health and time-frames and responsibilities that will ensure cycling
well being of the community and is an excellent recre- plays an important part in our transport and recreation sys-
ational family activity for people of all ages. Many cyclists tems.
are encouraged as a result of recreational experiences, to
use their bicycles for non-recreational trips. The objectives of the Strategy are that:
ensure appropriate legislative framework for cycling identify a practical bicycle route network with appro-
having regard to safety, good traffic engineering prac- priate links to adjacent regions or networks;
tice and credibility of the law;
develop engineering measures and programs to over-
encourage cycling for the environmental, recreational come problems including estimated costs, time frame
and health benefits to cyclists and the wider and an implementation plan;
community;
develop bicycle network support requirements (e.g.
reduce the frequency of bicycle crashes and the sever- bicycle parking, kerb ramps, drinking water fountains,
ity of injuries resulting from crashes; signage);
ensure cycling facilities serve the needs of the relevant review construction and maintenance practices and
categories of cyclists; educate staff responsible for these tasks, so they
accommodate the needs of cyclists in their work (e.g.
provide guidance to encourage a high level of compli- landscaping, road works and irrigation).
ance by cyclists with traffic laws, and by other road
and path users in relation to cyclists, covering both For the community to derive maximum benefit from its
educational and enforcement needs; Local Strategic Bicycle Plan it is essential that the plan
produce positive, practical and affordable outcomes, that
encourage the establishment of a strong and pro-active meet user needs.
cycling industry, including manufacturers, traders and
the tourism industry operators; It is suggested that the development of these local strate-
gic bicycle plans should be overseen by a Steering
ensure the systematic measuring, auditing or evalua- Committee comprised of representatives of:
tion, of programs and facilities; and
the Council;
facilitate on-going research and investigation of new
Council engineering, urban planning and recreation
initiatives.
staff;
The basic aims of the local plans would usually include 2.3. Categories of Cyclists
the following:
There are seven broad groups of cyclists for which plan-
survey the extent and nature of cycling within the ners and engineers have to cater, which indicates that
municipality or region; cyclists are a very diverse group of road users. They
determine the cycling requirements of the community; include those who have not achieved a legal qualification
to drive a motor car, and as such have not received formal
identify factors that inhibit cycling; education on road traffic laws. In addition, a cyclist may
PLANNING FOR CYCLISTS 5
fulfil a number of needs on a single trip, or a cyclist may Commuter cyclists often travel significant distances, wear
belong to more than one group. special clothing, generate a lot of body heat and can have
a large investment in their bicycle and equipment. They
The broad groups are:
therefore need suitable end of trip facilities including
Primary school children; showers, lockers and secure bicycle parking. These
aspects should be taken into account when planning facil-
Secondary school children; ities for this group.
Recreational cyclists;
Utility cyclists ride for varying but specific purposes, such
Commuter cyclists; as for shopping, travel to community facilities or to visit
friends. Their routes are unpredictable but in general of a
Utility cyclists;
relatively short length, and occur along roads not subject
Touring cyclists; and to high levels of traffic. The skill level of utility cyclists
varies greatly. Their needs include the provision of a com-
Sports cyclists in training. prehensive network of `low stress' routes and appropriate
Each group has specific characteristics, and hence specif- end of trip facilities, at various commercial and institu-
ic needs with respect to programs and facilities. tional destinations.
The cognitive skills of primary school children are not Touring cyclists make extensive long distance journeys or
fully developed (Sandels S. 1974: Hoffman, Payne and shorter trips around local areas of tourist significance.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Prescott, 1978) and young children also have little They travel both solo and in groups, and may be either
knowledge of road traffic laws. For these reasons chil- lightly or heavily (to be self sufficient) equipped. Often,
dren of a primary school age should only ride on or near their route choice characteristics are similar to other
roads with supervision until they have the skills and tourists.
knowledge to do so alone. Generally, the appropriate
facility for primary school children is an off-road path or
Sporting cyclists travel long distances on the arterial road
a `quiet' residential street.
system in training for the various events in which they
The skill of secondary school students varies greatly. For compete. They often travel in groups of two or more and
older students (14 and over), the majority of cycling takes ride two abreast in States and Territories where it is legal
place on-road. Off road facilities provided for this group to do so, thus occupying the left hand lane of the road. The
are often under-utilised if the road system is more direct routes they use for training are often different to those
and faster. used by commuter cyclists and may involve challenging
terrain in outer urban and rural areas. However, many
The experience, age and skill of recreational cyclists also
sporting cyclists also commute to work as part of their
vary greatly. They generally desire a pleasant recreational
training. The needs of sporting cyclists on the road system
experience along off-road paths and quiet local streets,
are similar to commuters; their primary requirements
avoiding congested, heavily trafficked routes. Nevertheless,
a large proportion of experienced recreational cyclists will
being a smooth even surface and adequate space to oper-
prefer to use the road system for long journeys. ate safely. Off-road paths are generally not suitable for this
group to train on because of the high speeds and potential
There are two types of commuter cyclists; those who conflict with other path users.
prefer paths or low stress roads and are willing to take
longer to get to their destination, and those who wish to Because each of the above groups have different charac-
get to their destination as quickly as possible regardless of teristics it will often be necessary to provide facilities for
traffic conditions. The former type vary greatly in age, more than one group within an area or corridor. For exam-
skill and fitness. The latter type are usually highly skilled ple, it may be necessary and appropriate to provide a bicy-
and are generally able to handle a variety of traffic condi- cle lane or wide kerbside lane for commuter cyclists, as
tions including the high stress levels experienced on busy well as a separate path for primary school children (refer
arterial roads. Their primary requirements are space to Figure 2-1). In these instances it will be necessary to eval-
operate (wide kerbside lane or an exclusive bicycle lane) uate the costs and benefits of providing for each group in
and a smooth, even surface.
the development of programs and budgets. Where facili-
These commuter cyclists are concerned with travel time ties are shared by different bicycle user groups attention
and therefore prefer to use the most direct and convenient needs to be paid to the design (e.g. width, horizontal align-
route. They often have no reasonable choice other than to ment, gradient) of facilities to ensure safe and efficient
use undesirably busy roads, and therefore often `choose' to operation. It may also be necessary to regulate and enforce
use other slower routes where the arterial road conditions the appropriate use of off-road facilities where the conflict
are intolerable to them. between different groups becomes a problem.
6 BICYCLES
2.4. Bicycle Programs convenient bicycle access into and through all residen-
tial, commercial and industrial subdivisions and major
Bicycle programs are concerned with both transport net- developments, including pedestrian malls if conflict
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
work improvements and behavioural issues. The objective with pedestrians is not likely to be a problem;
is to make cycling safer, more convenient and hence an
attractive alternative means of transport. Programs will the ability to carry bicycles on public transport vehi-
address issues relating to education, encouragement, cles so that multi mode travel using bicycles and public
enforcement and engineering but these 4 E's should usual- transport becomes more attractive for longer trips
ly be regarded as inter-related components of the same (sect. 2.5);
program, rather than separate programs. For example, as a
network of bicycle routes is developed within a city or secure long term and short term bicycle parking facili-
town (Engineering) it will be necessary to: ties in shopping centres, in all commercial, industrial
and institutional developments, at railway stations and
promote it through advertising, pamphlets and maps at bus, tram, ferry and airport terminals (sect. 10.3);
(Encouragement);
teach people who use it how to ride safely and courte- shower facilities in commercial and industrial build-
ously (Education); and ings (sect. 10.2);
insist that relevant laws and regulations be obeyed for safe routes to schools;
the benefit of all users (Enforcement).
well defined exclusive bicycle lanes on all arterial and
These components should be addressed in National and collector roads in particular, where a significant cyclist
State (or Territory) strategies, and in local strategic bicycle demand exists (or where it is desired to encourage
plans. increased use of bicycles) and space is available; pro-
vision of kerbside lanes of an adequate width to
2.4.1. Bicycle Route Network & Infrastructure accommodate cyclists on all other roads where space is
available (sect. 4.4.1).
2.4.1.1. General
The improvement and extension of transport networks to It should be noted that many off-road paths are not
better accommodate cycling involves many disciplines suitable for commuter cyclists because the paths are
within engineering including planning, design, construc- indirect and do not lead to useful destinations;
tion and maintenance. In this context transport networks
do not only include off-road paths but all roads and the the adoption of road and path construction and mainte-
public transport system as well. The objective is to provide nance practices which result in road and path surfaces
a comprehensive network that will suit the desire lines of which are free of debris and smooth enough to provide
cyclists by connecting common origins and destinations of a reasonable level of comfort for cyclists (sect's. 8.2
trips. Engineering programs and initiatives should aim to and 8.3);
achieve the following:
`calming' of traffic in local street networks, in a
A designated Principal or Regional Bicycle Network manner that does not reduce the convenience or safety
comprised of major roads, minor roads and paths of cycling, to fully integrate bicycle and motor traffic
intended to serve longer distance commuter and recre- (sect. 4.7);
PLANNING FOR CYCLISTS 7
paths which are interesting, wide enough to allow groups where conflict between groups creates safety or
cyclists to safely pass each other or pedestrians; have operational problems (sect. 9); and
adequate geometric design including stopping sight
high standard exclusive bicycle paths where there is a
distance across the inside of curves; do not have steep
demand for high speed commuter travel (sect. 6.6.3).
downgrades combined with tight horizontal curves
(sect. 6); The illustration in Figure 2-3 provides a summary of the
physical measures which may be taken to improve and
implementation of regulatory, warning and guidance develop a road and path network so that it supports cycling
signs or other controls on paths used by a mix of user as a safe and convenient mode of transport.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Legend
000000000000 Existing On Road Bicycle Facility
- - - - - - - Proposed On Road Bicycle Facility
Existing Off Road Bicycle Facility
8
00
I
' 11
_____
- LJ
U
BICYCLES
__________
JC
-
I
I 1
ii'
RAILWAY STATION
TtON
1 Smooth debris free 5 Shared footway at squeeze 9 Controlled crossings for 13 Paths for recreation and connec- 17 Connections to paths
surfaces on all roads point cyclists and pedestrians tion of housing areas to commu-
nity facilities and city centre 1s 'Bicycle friendly' local area
2O Exclusive bike lanes O Shared footway alternative to 8 Centre of road refuge traffic management to lower
on arterial roads road at roundabout 1a Bridges connecting residential speed and volume of motor
11 Secure short, medium or areas and facilities traffic
O Wide kerbside lanes Shared footway alternative to long term bicycle parking
narrow lanes at signals as required 15 Drainage culvert or road bridges 1s Parking showers and
O Bicycle/Parking lanes and/or busy road used as underpass for path lockers
1z Path to encourage dual
Standup lanes and advanced mode and connect to com- 16 Shared path in plantation High speed commuter path
zo
stoplines at signals munity facilities reserve in rail reservation
PLANNING FOR CYCLISTS 9
It is important that municipal or road authorities prepare facility (road or path) and in the case of roads, to deter-
plans illustrating ultimate route networks, and that these mine whether bicycle lanes or another form of road treat-
be disseminated to relevant organisations and sections ment is required.
thereof, to ensure the network is accommodated in future
development proposals. In particular, the flow chart identifies the circumstances
beyond which treatment is desirable.
2.4.1.2. Type of Facility Required The flow chart is an assessment of the primary factors
needed to determine the type of facility required. It is
The flow chart in Figure 2-4 is provided to assist design- acknowledged that other issues, constraints and practices
ers and road authorities to choose the appropriate type of will also have a bearing on the decision making process.
3. A traffic volume of 3000 motor vehicles per day is law. However, police involvement in cycling should be
widely regarded as the highest level beyond which more constructive than simply penalising offenders.
provision for cyclists should be made, in view of the Initiatives relating to enforcement may include:
level of the stress experienced by cyclists, and of road
safety concerns. It is also in accord with urban road seminars to educate police in the role they can play in
network planning criteria. bicycle strategies and plans to improve cycle safety;
individualised marketing campaigns such as travel transport travellers frequently pass and a reasonable level
demand management programs; of security lighting exists. Access to stations should be via
ramps, not stairs, to enable ease of access for bicycles and
the organisation of special bicycle rides and other wheel chairs.
events such as national conferences;
To be successful, multi mode travel also requires promo-
provision of a comprehensive set of education pro-
tion through advertisement on public transport station bul-
grams;
letin boards and in local papers.
development of comprehensive engineering programs
Local Government, State and Federal Road Authorities
to provide networks, continuous routes, safer and
also have a role to play in promoting multi mode by ensur-
smoother roads and paths;
ing that bicycle routes to railway stations, airports, ferry
provision of adequate `end of trip' facilities such as terminals, bus terminals and tram terminals are safe, con-
showers and secure parking; and venient and clearly marked.
A large percentage of the population of cities reside and so that precincts for schools, shopping, housing, commer-
work within easy cycling distance of railway stations or cial and industrial purposes are served by a network of
other major transport interchanges. Multi mode travel, through roads, collector roads, local streets and paths, any
where people are encouraged to combine bicycle travel number of which may be used for a single trip by bicycle.
with public transport thereby increasing the range of bicy- The design of the area should take into account the
cle travel, has significant potential. This is clearly illus- requirements of any proposed Principal Bicycle Network.
trated in Figure 2-5 which shows a plot of the penetration
that combined bicycle/train travel has in Melbourne The urban planning of each precinct should provide a very
assuming relatively short rides of only 7.5 minutes to and good level of accessibility to cyclists travelling in any
from the railway stations. direction by providing connections to the road network
and path systems at frequent intervals. Such a design will
It is in the interest of Public Transport Authorities to sup- provide direct and safe routes for both long distance com-
port multi mode travel (e.g. bicycles in combination with muter trips and short local trips. Paths through reserves
buses, ferries, trains, trams, light rail vehicles) because it (open spaces) which link common cycling destinations
enables longer cross town trips to be achieved using bicy- such as schools and shops with housing allow young and
cles and should assist in increasing public transport inexperienced cyclists to avoid busy main roads.
patronage. The package of measures adopted by these Consideration should be given to providing priority to
authorities may enable bicycles to be carried free of path users at the path intersections with low volume local
charge on public transport vehicles at all possible times roads. Railway stations and other public transport termi-
and perhaps the provision of special bicycle storage facil- nals should also be fed by paths and bicycle routes on
ities on trains or buses. local roads to encourage multi-modal travel.
If multi mode cycling is to be encouraged it is paramount The major physical elements required to make an
that all railway stations and transport terminals should be urban area supportive of travel by bicycle are shown in
provided with secure bicycle parking. Secure, long term, Figure 2-3.
weatherproof bicycle parking, namely lockers (Sect.
10.3.5(a)), should be provided for those patrons who wish
to use a bicycle at one end of the multi mode trip. The Perth 2.7. The Development and Evaluation
Better Public Transport Plan (1998) highlights the need for of Bicycle Programs
coin operated lockers, for casual but secure parking, in
Bicycle programs should generally emanate from a State
addition to traditional long term rental schemes for lockers.
bicycle strategy or from a local strategic bicycle plan
Bicycle parking rails (sect. 10.3.5(c)) are also necessary although they may also result from community concern!
for bicycle riding patrons who wish to use public transport about specific issues.
for a few hours and avoid paying for a locker. Parking rails
are also useful for spill over parking in times of heavy In developing programs it is most important to base then
on the best possible information. Programs may be gener
demand for special events such as sporting matches.
al or be aimed at specific bicycle user groups or aspects c
Bicycle parking should preferably be in view of station cycling. Depending on the type of program, informatio
attendants but at least should be in an area where public might be obtained from:
12 BICYCLES
RP.SPr
Etfham
Cobcg
Essen
Heidelberg
Jewell
Clifton H
Boybrok
Oaklands
Junction
MELBOURNE
Yarra
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Hart*
High
lwl: -.15.
Map showing how far cyclists and walkers 'Cheltenham
-a Cycling at 20 km/h
71/2 minutes for 2.5km.
24 km
N
5 kilometres
E
a)
E
0
c Walking at 6.5 km/h Chelsea
!.1 TO FRANKSTON
71/2 minutes for 0.8km.
Courtesy of Alan Parker Desic
government census - in some instances care is required to bicycle safety audit processes (Appendix A). This will
when using data obtained through the census in rela- involve:
tion to cycling, as this is carried out in August when
cycling is at a low level and weather conditions are measurement of use, throughout the implementation
quite poor, in many population centres; process of facilities and programs;
identification of problems;
specific studies and surveys;
implementation of solutions to those problems; and
crash statistics and hospital admission records;
consultation with local bicycle groups.
local bicycle groups;
The lessons learned and information gained should then be
counts of bicycle traffic - these may be obtained from communicated to those involved in planning and design
observational surveys or using electronic traffic survey with respect to bicycles and cycling. Many programs will
equipment; or have to be evaluated in reference to program objectives
whilst physical network improvements may be evaluated
existing programs. in relation to use and compliance with various standards
A count at one or more locations will often provide good and good practice.
information about the use of a particular facility. However,
where facilities do not exist or where behavioural issues 2.8. Bicycle Planners
are involved, surveys may be necessary (e.g. interviews or
Planners, engineers and designers of bicycle facilities
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Information. Bovy and Bradley (1985) found that surface quality and
trip length were about equal and both were twice as impor-
These requirements apply equally on roads and on paths. tant to cyclists as traffic volumes and the availability of
bicycle facilities in cyclists' route choice.
By implication the important objective of a safe environ-
ment for cyclists must exist, given the provision of space
to ride, a smooth surface and the ability of cyclists to 3.4. Speed Maintenance
maintain their speed.
For bicycles to be most effective as a means of transport
cyclists must be able to maintain speed without having to
3.2. Space to Ride slow or stop often. Cyclists typically travel at speeds
between 20 km/h and 30 km/h although they may reach in
The bicycle design envelope and clearances shown in excess of 50 km/h down hills. Once slowed or stopped it
Figure 3-1 provides the basis for the design of the bicycle takes considerable time and effort to regain the desired
facilities described in later sections of this document. It is operating speed.
important for designers to understand the basis of the
design including clearance requirements so that they can Bicycle routes, especially off-road, should be designed for
make judgements in difficult situations where a knowl- continuous riding, minimising the need to slow or stop for
edge of minimum space requirements is needed. The enve- any reason including steep gradients, rough surfaces, sharp
lope is relevant to the design of lanes on roads, off-road corners, obscured sight lines, intersections, or to give way
paths and bicycle parking facilities. to other people because the width available is too narrow.
On many roads cyclists are confined to the extreme left
The 1.0 metre wide envelope allows for the width of a hand side by motor vehicles and a rough surface prevents
bicycle and for variations in tracking. Not all bicycle cyclists from maintaining an acceptable speed.
riders can steer a straight line and when riding up-hill
experienced riders work the bicycle from side to side
whilst the inexperienced may wobble. Bicycle riders also
3.5. Connectivity
need adequate clearances to fixed objects and to passing Connectivity is that quality of a bicycle route or route net-
vehicles in addition to the 1.0 metre envelope. work, describing the continuous nature of facilities or of
the continuous nature of desired conditions.
In some situations it may be appropriate to provide for
alternative forms of pedal cycles in the design of facilities. Cyclists need to be able to undertake and complete mean-
With reference to Appendix C, operational characteristics ingful trips by bicycle. For recreation it may be from a res-
and advice on the means of designing for `human powered idential area to a picnic spot, for a specific purpose trip
vehicles' (HPV's) are provided in the event that a route or from home to work or the shops. Bicycle routes compris-
facility is anticipated to be used by a large number of these ing roads and paths should combine to form an effective,
vehicles. convenient and safe network.
In general the least manoeuvrable HPV served by these Connectivity is an important aspect of the construction of
guidelines is a tandem bicycle. effective bicycle routes. Before a route is constructed the
BICYCLE RIDER REQUIREMENTS 15
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
4 Roads
maintenance programs where opportunities exist to Further details on gradients for cyclists are provided in
provide space for cyclists by altering lane markings. Section 6.3.6.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Most bicycle riding is done on roads. The vertical and hor- Due to the side `wind' force exerted on bicycle riders from
izontal alignment standard adopted on roads to serve the heavy vehicles, roads should be designed to provide satis-
needs of motor traffic will normally be satisfactory for factory clearances between the bicycle envelope and the
bicycle riding provided the operational aspects of cycling vehicle. At motor vehicle speeds of 60, 80 and 100 km/h
are understood by road authorities, engineers, planners clearances between the cyclist envelope and an adjacent
and designers. truck of 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 metres respectively should be pro-
vided to enhance cyclist safety (see Figure 3-1). Wider clear-
4.2.2. Gradients ances may be appropriate for speeds in excess of 100 km/h.
Whilst motor vehicles have little difficulty climbing most Similar clearances to cars should be provided in order that
hills bicycle riders prefer to avoid hills wherever possible. cyclists do not feel unduly threatened by general motor
They normally select the flattest alternative route to min- traffic. However, the inability to achieve these clearances
imise the amount of climbing. In climbing steep hills should not preclude the provision of a facility having a
experienced cyclists work the bicycle from side to side lesser clearance unless a suitable alternative route or means
whilst the inexperienced tend to wobble. In situations of accommodating cyclists exists within the road reserve.
ROADS 17
In most instances, a range of treatment widths have been with a speed limit in excess of 70 - 80 km/h, given the 85`"
provided in the sections below. The following factors percentile speed of cyclists under free flow conditions is in
should be the subject of careful assessment when choosing the order of 30 km/h (Shepherd, 1994).
the actual lane or treatment widths:
Similarly, where hills exist, the lower speed differential
parking conditions; between motor and bicycle traffic for downhill travel, and
motor vehicle speed; the `wobble' effect for uphill travel (sect. 4.2.2), are such
motor vehicle volume; that it may be appropriate to provide a bicycle lane treat-
bicycle/parking lane width; ment in the uphill direction only, where width constraints
bicycle volume; exist and there is no opportunity for the provision of a
car lane width; bicycle lane in the downhill direction.
percentage of heavy vehicles; and
alignment of road. 4.2.6. Public Lighting
Consultation should also occur with the State Road Public lighting is important in all of the environments used
Authority and the relevant organisations representing by cyclists, particularly roads, due to the relatively incon-
cyclists regarding the provisions of the facilities. spicuous form of cyclists and as a vulnerable road user in
terms of general road safety and personal security. As such
The demand for the adjoining motor traffic lanes is also an
there is some justification for high levels of lighting along
important issue in assessing the adequacy of bicycle lanes.
strategic bicycle road routes. Such routes should at least be
Where a road is operating close to capacity and narrow
illuminated in accordance with the relevant standards for
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Whilst not a common problem, the capacity of bicycle Traffic lanes for cyclists should be viewed as part of a
lanes may need to be considered in a few instances. The bicycle network providing the connectivity required to
information provided in Section 6.3.3 is also applicable to enhance the convenience and safety of trips by bicycle.
bicycle lanes on roads. Surface conditions and edge clear- The flow chart in Figure 4-1 is a basic guide to assist
ances to kerbs need to be considered in the assessment of designers and road authorities to choose the appropriate
the capacity of road lanes for bicycles. type of lane or other road treatment for cyclists.
4.2.5. Speed Issues The flow chart only considers the primary factors needed
to determine the type of treatment required. As for the
As vulnerable road users, the issue of speed limits on associated guide charts in this document (refer Figure 2-4
roads is important to cyclists. In addition to significant and and Figure 6-15), there are other issues, constraints and
widely acknowledged improvements in community safety practices that will have a bearing on the decision making
and amenity, negligible travel time cost increases and process. It is acknowledged that urban planning strategies,
reduced motor traffic noise and exhaust emissions (AUS- financial, commercial and political considerations, and
TROADS, 1996), there are potential benefits for road hybrid treatment options (e.g. asymmetric road cross-sec-
authorities in the provision of bicycle facilities. tional choices, see sect. 4.3.2(b)) will influence the final
choice of treatment for a given road or locality.
The guides for the provision of facilities provided in
Figure 2-4 and Figure 4-1 are based on typical conditions The flow chart should be read in conjunction with the
and considerations. However, where lower traffic speeds following notes.
exist, the need for treatment or for wider clearances (sect.
4.2.3), is reduced. Notes (Figure 4-1):
Where the difference between bicycle and motor traffic 1. In general the treatments are arranged around the
speeds is less than 20 km/h, full integration may be accept- desired preferences for treatment (Exclusive Bicycle
able, i.e. where bicycles and motor traffic share the road Lane highest priority). The order of preference may
without any special provisions. Conversely, segregation is vary locally or on a regional basis.
most desirable where the difference between bicycle and
2. See Section 4.3.2, and the respective sections on the
motor traffic speeds exceeds 40 km/h (Godefrooij, 1992).
construction requirements for individual lane facilities
On this basis it is preferable that wide kerbside lane treat- (also referred to in the figure), for advice on obtaining
ments (sect. 4.4.7) are avoided where possible along roads space to implement the particular facility.
18 BICYCLES
Is road a section of a
Strategic Bicycle Route'
Notes (Figure 4-1, cont.) lanes along it to promote a safe and convenient route
between suburbs and/or community facilities.
3. The option for shoulder sealing is located in a conve-
nient position in the chart and is not listed by order of Conversely, where a local street forms part of a bicycle route
preference. In general, this option is applicable to rural it may not be necessary for cyclists, or desirable in terms of
roads where motor traffic speeds are high, bicycle vol- the visual amenity of the street, to mark bicycle lanes.
umes are low and the expense of a separate (i.e. from
In considering the width that can be made available for a
the road) path treatment is unlikely to be warranted.
bicycle lane, it is essential to consider also the width that
is or may be required for all other road user groups.
4. In utilising part time treatments, care is required to
ensure reasonable conditions exist for cycling outside
of the periods when these treatments are in operation 4.3.2. Finding Space for Treatment
(also see sect. 4.4.1).
Having determined that bicycle lanes or another form of
provision for cyclists is required along a road, it is neces-
5. The shared use of the kerbside lanes of roads in 80
sary to implement those treatments in circumstances
km/h (or higher) speed zones is relatively stressful for
where space is often limited, the demands for the use of
many cyclists. However it is often not possible to pro-
that space is high, or where the cost to utilise any available
vide marked lanes or a left lane of a satisfactory width. space is high.
In these instances, regardless of whether an alternative
route can be identified and developed, it is essential to
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
4.4. Road Treatments for Cyclists Exclusive bicycle lanes should be constructed in accor-
dance with the details shown in Table 4-1, and the associ-
4.4.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes ated facility layout shown in Figure 4-3.
Description and Purpose The width adopted for exclusive bicycle lanes will vary
depending on the number of cyclists, the speed of motor
An exclusive bicycle lane is a lane created by pavement traffic, the volume of large vehicles and the ability to make
marking and signs. It is the preferred treatment for cyclists space available given the needs of other road user groups,
on roads. In general it is located at the left side of a road. physical constraints and budgetary constraints.
An example of an exclusive bicycle lane is shown in
Figure 4-2. However, the following provides a guide:
In general, motor traffic is prohibited by traffic regulations 3.0 metres is the absolute maximum width and is desir-
from travelling in the lane except to access property or to able where the adjacent motor traffic is moving at high
turn at intersections. Similarly parking in the lane is pro- speed (e.g. 100 km/h) and large vehicles are a signifi-
hibited either full time or otherwise during the designated cant proportion of the traffic stream or where demand
periods of operation of the lane. for cycling is so great that this width is required on
An exclusive bicycle lane may be appropriate where: operational grounds. This is the desirable width
required to enable cyclists to overtake each other with
bicycle traffic is concentrated, e.g. near schools or sufficient clearance to the adjacent traffic lane;
along major routes near city or town centres;
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
a road is carrying or is likely to carry more than 3000 1.5 metres is the desirable width to be used along the
vehicles per day and/or a significant percentage of length of a lane, in a 60 km/h speed zone;
heavy vehicles.
1.2 metres is the absolute minimum width to be used
along the length of a lane and should only be used
where the provision of a wider lane is impracticable, in
a 60 km/h speed zone;
vided to state the limited times of operation of the facility Table 4-1: Exclusive Bicycle Lane & Sealed
(refer Figure 9-1). Shoulder Dimensions (See Notes on page 21)
ROADS 21
.
Traffic ton*)
L-M
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Notes (applicable to Table 4-1): peak travel demands of cyclists and motor vehicles
(e.g. clearway times, school travel hours -also see sect.
1. The posted or general speed limit is used, unless 85th 2.4.1.2). When cyclist demand is mainly in peak peri-
percentile speed is known and is significantly higher. ods and parking is required throughout the day the
2. Interpolation for different speed limits is acceptable. exclusive lane and adjacent traffic lane can provide an
appropriate width for the lane to act as a bicycle/park-
3. The width of the lane is normally measured from the ing lane;
face of the adjacent left hand kerb. The width of road
gutters/channels (comprising a different surface are of considerable advantage on long uphill grades
medium) should be less than 0.4m where minimum where there is a higher speed differential between
dimensions are used. The figures in the table presume motor vehicles and cyclists and cyclists tend to weave
that surface conditions are to be of the highest stan- about whilst working their way uphill; and
dard. Where there are poor surface conditions (see are also advantageous on long downhill grades where
sect. 8.5.1) over a section of road adjacent to the gutter, extra room to manoeuvre is desirable.
then the width of the Exclusive Bicycle Lane should be
measured from the outside edge of that section. `Peak Period' Exclusive Bicycle Lanes
It may be appropriate for designers to give consideration `Peak period' exclusive bicycle lanes are common on
to the interaction of cyclists with adjacent traffic, in vary- roads designated with Clearways. The restriction of park-
ing speed environments or where unusual circumstances ing during peak traffic periods usually coincides with peak
exist. The details provided in Figure 4-4 can be used as a cyclist numbers. On roads where the adjoining land use is
basis to assist calculations for the facility width under such predominantly residential, the installation of bicycle lanes
circumstances. during peak periods can be a compromise between the
adjoining residents' desire for on-street parking and
Other important aspects relating to exclusive bicycle lanes cyclists' need for designated road space. The timing of the
are that they: parking restrictions to coincide with local secondary
should be provided on both sides of the road where school opening and closure times has the additional
possible so that use is in the same direction as motor advantage of providing a separate cycling facility for
vehicle traffic; school children.
should not be placed between the kerb and parked cars After the installation of peak period exclusive bicycle
as there is no escape for cyclists should a car door be lanes it has been observed that residents and their visitors
opened suddenly; are more likely to utilise private driveways for parking and
as a consequence there is a marked reduction in the inci-
should only be used where there is little demand for dence of kerbside parking during all periods. Hence peak
parking throughout the day or where parking can be period, exclusive bicycle lanes can be advantageous to
prohibited during certain designated hours to suit the cyclists outside of peak traffic periods.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
22
BICYCLES
Figure 4-4: Vehicle Positions on Road Carriageway associated with Exclusive Bicycle Lanes
ROADS 23
Installation of a bicycle/car parking lane (refer Figure 4-5) Figure 4-5: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane (Thebarton, S.A.)
provides a means of improving conditions for cyclists
where parking occurs. Such a lane should enable a cyclist In general, motor traffic is prohibited by traffic regulations
to ride with adequate clearance to moving vehicles in the from either travelling or parking in the bicycle lane section
adjacent traffic lane and also to avoid an opening door of a of the facility except to access property, to turn at inter-
parked car without having to enter the adjacent traffic lane. sections, to park, and the like.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
The presence of parked cars puts cyclists under additional Application Details
stress as they must constantly search for car occupants to
assess whether a door is likely to be opened into their path. A bicycle/car parking lane is created by pavement mark-
Collisions between cyclists and opening doors of parked ings, which allocate space for cycling and for car parking,
cars are a significant concern to cyclists. Such incidents and by signs which give the lane its legal status.
should be an equal concern for car occupants in view of
Bicycle/car parking lanes should be constructed in accor-
their duty of care obligations.
dance with the details shown in Table 4-2, and the associ-
Bicycle/car parking lanes may provide safety and other ated facility layout shown in Figure 4-6.
benefits for other road users, due to: Also:
improved clearances for parking and un-parking 4.5 metres is the acceptable maximum width as a
manoeuvres, and for the entering and exiting of parked greater width may result in moving cars attempting to
vehicles by drivers; utilise the bicycle lane. It provides acceptable clear-
ances in cases where parking turnover is significant or
more efficient use of the road-space on which they are
traffic speeds are in excess of 60 km/h but less than 80
implemented;
km/h;
reduced effective motor traffic lane crossing distance 4.2 metres is the desirable width where speeds are
for pedestrians; and about 60 km/h as it provides comfortable clearance to
parked cars;
improved channelisation of traffic and hence more
orderly and predictable traffic flow, and often better 4.0 metres is the acceptable minimum width where
sight conditions. traffic speeds are about 60 km/h as it enables a cyclist
to travel adjacent to parked and moving cars at a rea-
Bicycle/car parking lanes are most appropriate where the
sonable speed with minimum clearances; and
street is wide, there is a demand for parking (and where
road space and capacity requirements allow parking 3.7 metres is the absolute minimum width as this
throughout the day. They may be achieved by reducing the requires cyclists to ride close to the adjacent traffic
widths of other traffic lanes where space is available on lane in order to avoid a potential collision with a car
existing roads. A bicycle/car parking lane should not be door. This is in accord with the research by Loder and
provided where parking demand is low or subject to `no Bayly (sect. 4.4.7). This width is only acceptable
standing' restrictions during some periods, unless kerbed where the mean traffic speed is no more than about 50
projections are built to prevent the use of the lane by km/h, most parked vehicles are cars, parking turnover
through motor traffic. is low or space is limited.
24 BICYCLES
'
Car pwki s/ to
occardar With AS1742.11 -^-
k
at
t S
("WO
a
Traffic L
100 mm *We'Unbr Line e
4.0 4.5 basis to assist calculations for the facility width in such
circumstances.
Acceptable Range 3.7-4.5 4.0-4.7
Other
Table 4-2: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane Dimensions
(Parallel Parking) Other important aspects of bicycle/car parking lanes are:
Notes (Table 4-2): full integration of bicycles with other traffic may be
1. The posted or general speed limit is used, unless 85th preferable where parking turnover is high, through
percentile speed is known and is significantly higher. traffic speeds are low and the desirable minimum
widths cannot be achieved. Alternatively consideration
2. Interpolation for different speed limits is acceptable. could be given to an edge line treatment (sect. 4.4.6.1);
With reference to Figure 4-6, parking bays for the cars other than as described in section 4.4.6.1, a bicycle
should be marked at the minimum width of 2.1 metres. lane should not be provided between parked cars and
This is necessary where space is restricted to encourage the kerb, either in the case of parallel parking or angle
drivers to park very close to the kerb. parking;
Wider parking bays are appropriate where space is not if through motor traffic is likely to use the lane where
restricted (i.e. overall facility width in excess of 4.0m) or parking is light, the lane should be commenced with
where wide vehicles are the dominant type of vehicle some form of delineation to discourage traffic away from
using the parking bays. the area of the bicycle/car parking lanes. The delineation
may be comprised of a combination of pavement mark-
It can be seen that the minimum width required to achieve
ings and pavement bars, however raised kerb projections
acceptable bicycle/car parking lanes on a two way road,
similar to those shown in Figure 4-22 are considered to
assuming that 3.0 metre lanes are necessary for the central
be necessary where traffic volumes are high; and
traffic lanes, is 13.4 metres. However, many road reserva-
tions in cities are 20.0 metres wide with only 12.8 metres it is preferable to mark the parking bays or a line
between kerbs. Where such roads have relatively low traf- between parked cars and the edge line of the motor
fic volumes and very few trucks or buses, the best that may traffic lane in order to adequately define the space to be
be achieved in a 60 km/h speed zone for cyclists is to mark occupied by cyclists. Under some State regulations
3.5 metre wide bicycle/car parking lanes and 2.9 metre these markings are required.
central traffic lanes, without a safety strip, or alternatively
use an Edge Line treatment (sect. 4.4.6.1). In spite of the 4.4.2.2. With Angle Parking
restricted width it could be expected that cyclists will ben-
efit from motorists being alerted to the presence of cyclists. Description and Purpose
A safety strip is desirable where the overall facility width Bicycle/car parking lanes, associated with angle car park-
is in excess of 3.7m wide (sect. 9.6.1.2). A safety strip is ing spaces are relatively uncommon but have been used in
considered to be an important feature where the width of several States (refer Figure 4-8), with both a reverse-in and
the bicycle lane section exceeds 2.0 metres. reverse-out orientation.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
ROADS
Figure 4-7: Vehicle Positions on Road Carriageway associated with Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes (Parallel Parking)
25
26 BICYCLES
There is a tendency for cyclists to travel too close to Figure 4-9: Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes (Angle Parking) - Layout
parked vehicles, and the lane facility promotes cycling in
a position that aids visibility between drivers and cyclists. Notes (applicable to Table 4-3):
In general, motor traffic is prohibited by traffic regulations
from either travelling or parking in the bicycle lane section 1. Measured from kerb face to centre-of-road-side line of
of the facility. bicycle lane. These dimensions assume parked cars
Application Details can overhang of the kerb. An additional 0.6 metres
should be added where overhanging of the kerb is not
Bicycle/car parking lanes, where angle parking exists, possible (i.e. parking to a wall).
should be constructed in accordance with the details shown
in Table 4-3, and the associated facility layout shown 2. This facility should be constructed where the speed
Figure 4-9. This treatment is appropriate only where the limit is 70 km/h or less, but in general would be inap-
posted or general speed limit is 60 to 70 km/h (or less). propriate where the 85th percentile speed is known to
be significantly higher.
A safety strip should be provided to limit the potential use Contra-flow bicycle lanes should be considered an accept-
of the bicycle lane section by moving vehicles, particular- able treatment in urban environments where sufficient
ly when the parking demand is minimal, and as clearance road width exists to provide a safe treatment. They may be
for drivers reversing from car parks (sect. 9.6.1.2). appropriate to achieve inner-city links, or routes to schools
along lightly trafficked service roads.
Whilst the dimensions listed in Table 4-3 account for the
principal requirements of relevant car parking standards, In general, as for exclusive bicycle lanes, motor traffic is
designers should ensure the requirements of such stan- prohibited by traffic regulations from either travelling or
dards are met in all respects, where it is proposed to install parking in contra-flow bicycle lanes.
a bicycle lane adjacent to the outside of angle car parking.
As for parallel bicycle/car parking lanes, car parking in the Application Details
bicycle lane section is not permitted and therefore a line
between the parking and bicycle lane sections is required. The treatment is signed and marked as for an exclusive
bicycle lane (sect. 4.4.1), as detailed in Figure 4-10.
There is a preference by some bicycle groups and practi- Without continuous physical separation from the adjacent
tioners for 45 degree parking in some instances as opposed traffic lane it is generally appropriate in speed zones up to
to 60 degrees, on the basis of visibility. 60 km/h only.
to 'reverse-out', requires careful consideration. the width of contra-flow bicycle lanes should be consistent
with the advice provided in Section 4.4.1.
With 'reverse-out' angle parking the major potential for
conflict occurs during the un-parking manoeuvre and Physical separation generally by a traffic island, of the
during this manoeuvre the cyclist and other through traffic contra-flow bicycle lane from motor traffic, is most impor-
has right of way. tant at intersections (refer Figure 5-5). Physical separation
or a safety strip may also be necessary continuously or at
With 'reverse-in' angle parking the major potential for frequent intervals along the length of the lane to provide
conflict occurs during the parking manoeuvre where the protection for cyclists, where there is a possibility of
reversing car will be holding up the traffic including encroachment into the contra-flow bicycle lane. The width
cyclists. This is similar to the conflict that occurs during of physical separation at mid-block locations will depend
parallel parking manoeuvres. on the speed and volume of motor traffic using the road.
Also, whilst motorists leaving 'reverse-in' bays may have
a better view of approaching cyclists, there may be a ten- In low speed urban environments the contra-flow lane
dency for motorists to leave the bays at excessive speed.
must at least be defined by a well maintained solid line
throughout its length.
In general there is support for the implementation of the
lanes regardless of the orientation of parked cars. As there Cyclists travelling in the same direction as motor traffic
are fewer examples of 'reverse-in' facilities, Road author- along a one-way road may be provided with a bicycle lane
ities should proceed with caution where these are to be or they may be expected to integrate with motor traffic,
installed. depending on the road space available, road conditions
and other demands on it (e.g. car parking). This aspect
4.4.3. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes should be assessed in accordance with Section 2.4.1.2.
Description and Purpose Road authorities must ensure that contra-flow bicycle
lanes are established in a manner that is satisfactory from
A contra-flow bicycle lane is an exclusive bicycle lane
a legal viewpoint.
deployed on one side (to the left of the opposing direction
of traffic flow) of a one way street serving cyclists travel-
Other
ling against what is otherwise the legal direction of travel.
Alternatively, the treatment could be described as enabling
Contra-flow bicycle lanes may be placed between parked
cyclists to travel in both directions in a one-way street.
cars and the kerb where bicycle access is important.
It is advantageous to cyclists from a network viewpoint to Although this is not ideal it may be satisfactory where
allow contra-flow bicycle traffic access in one-way streets. cyclists do not need to frequently leave or join the facility
Also, due to the inconvenience of choosing an alternative over its length and cycling speeds are low. In such cases it
route, cyclists sometimes travel along one-way streets is imperative to provide a 1.0 metre separator (preferably
against the legal direction of traffic flow. a raised median) to allow for vehicle overhang or opening
car doors.
28 BICYCLES
Where parking occurs on the `right side' of a one-way traf- painted on the shoulder to warn motorists of the likely
fic lane (with respect to the general legal direction of presence of cyclists and to suggest to cyclists that they
travel), a contra-flow bicycle lane may be provided should use the shoulder. Freeways are a special case and
between the right side parking and the traffic lane. With may require special advisory signs (sect. 4.6.3). If suffi-
reference to Section 9.6.1.2, a safety strip is important in cient cyclist demand exists the shoulder may be marked
this instance, to improve the sight lines to approaching
cyclists from drivers preparing to exit the car park space.
Some important aspects relating to the use of sealed shoul- parking demand is low in the area of the treatment, and
ders by cyclists are: as a consequence would be removed; or
each section of sealed shoulder should continue over a the road is wide such that parking is retained adjacent
significant distance, preferably in excess of 500 to (but outside of) the bicycle path area. In this instance
metres. It is undesirable to have intermittent short sec- the facility is regarded as appropriate only where the
tions sealed with cyclists being `squeezed' at the end of parking is `long term'.
each section;
In general, the regulations applying to exclusive bicycle
The ends of each sealed shoulder section of road paths, in relation to travelling or stopping in protected
should taper to the adjacent length of road. Road side lanes, by motor traffic, pedestrians and others, would also
furniture and other obstructions (e.g. drainage chan- be applicable.
nels and culverts) should be located well clear of the
pavement in these transition zones;
where a sealed shoulder is closed for maintenance ade-
quate advance warning of the closure should be pro-
vided to cyclists. This is especially important on free-
ways and other high speed roads. Consideration should
be given to providing a temporary side track for
cyclists or a detour via a reasonable alternative route
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Application Details
4.4.5. Protected Two-Way Lanes
The essential elements comprising the facility are illus-
Description and Purpose trated by Figure 4-13. It is signed and delineated as an
This is an exclusive bicycle path (sect. 6.6.3) installed on exclusive bicycle path (sect. 6.6.3). It is generally appro-
one side of a road carriageway (refer Figure 4-12). This priate that the (R8-1) signs are installed on the nature strip
treatment may be appropriate where: next to the bicycle path section to limit the possibility of
confusion for road traffic.
origins and destinations are on the same side of the
road and as such road crossings can be avoided; It is anticipated the treatment would be established on an
existing road pavement in most instances.
there is no choice other than for a treatment within the
road reserve in a length generally consisting of paths At bus stops, a hard stand area should be provided on the
and where the need for road crossings by cyclists can nature strip to enable and encourage bus service partons to
be avoided; wait out of the bicycle path section. In addition suitable
access for entry to buses is required. This may involve the
relatively few driveway crossings exist, particularly construction of a flat top hump across the Protected Lane so
where the route is used by children, to avoid 'ride-out' that partons can move across the lane when a bus arrives,
(Cross and Fisher, 1977); and with safety, and not have to step up from pavement level.
30 BICYCLES
Focft Wfth
1,11
per ExdusWe
MC AA
I
E
-I
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
I L2m merit
2.1 - 2.m Pa
so
to
9
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Urn e
Pa"Men Sy
Because special signs and other pavement markings are Table 4-4 indicates the acceptable widths in 60 km/h speed
not required, wide kerbside lanes are a very cost effective zones (unless noted otherwise) for wide kerbside lanes,
way of providing space for cyclists, particularly on arteri- which are summarised as follows:
al and sub-arterial roads where there is limited space avail-
able to meet the requirements of all road users, and where 3.7 metres is the absolute minimum width. This width
clearways apply during peak hours. They are often readily is only suitable in 60 km/h zones where the operating
achievable by replacing lane lines in a different location as speeds are generally less than the posted limit and a
a part of road marking maintenance operations and hence wider lane is not feasible. A 1.0 metre clearance
have potential for large scale usage. between the envelope of a cyclist and a passing car or
truck can only be achieved if these vehicles encroach
Wide kerbside lanes are appropriate on all major traffic into the adjacent traffic lane;
routes and collector streets, whether divided or undivided,
on sections of road where parking is either minimal or pro- 4.0 metres is the desirable minimum width providing a
hibited during peak periods. 1.0 metre clearance between a car or a large truck and
the cyclist envelope, it being assumed that cars remain
within the left lane and trucks encroach 0.6 metres into
the adjacent traffic lane;
lane; and
motor vehicles. This is supported by McHenry et al It may be appropriate for designers to give consideration
(1985, US Study) who found that kerbside lane widths to the interaction of cyclists with adjacent traffic, in vary-
greater than 5.4 metres were excessive due to vehicles ing speed environments or where unusual circumstances
sharing the lane at intersections. exist. The details provided in Figure 4-19 can be used as a
basis to assist calculations for the required facility width
Careful consideration is required where encroachment under such circumstances.
into adjacent lanes may occur. Whether or not encroach-
ment is satisfactory is dependent on the number of trucks Other
or other wide vehicles in the kerbside lane, the level of
traffic (i.e. to determine if sufficient gaps are available) in In some States, bicycle pavement symbols are provided at
the next lane, and direction of traffic in the next lane. the kerbside on arterial roads and on other principal routes
on roads, to identify that the kerbside lane meets the
e Width" (m) requirements of Table 4-4.
Notes (Table 4-4): Table 4-7 are recommended. For divided 4 lane roads it
would be appropriate to use the kerb and median lane
1. The posted or general speed limit is used, unless 85th dimensions recommended in Table 4-6.
percentile speed is known and is significantly higher.
Figure 4-19: Vehicle Positions on Road Carriageway associated with Wide Kerbside Lanes
34 BICYCLES
TOW Width
2. With a kerbside lane width of 4.3 metres or greater it
e
(C Side) may be appropriate to mark an 1.5 metre wide
Exclusive Bicycle Lane
3.2 10.0
3.1 3.2 10.1 4.4.8. Bus/Bicycle Lanes
3.2
3.1 3.3 10.3 Where the left hand lane of an urban arterial road is a bus
3.2 3.3 10.4
lane it is unreasonable for cyclists to use the normal traf-
fic lane and they should be provided for as follows:
3,2 3.3 10.5
3.3 10.6 in congested city areas where peak period traffic
3.3 3.4 10.7 speeds are about 40 km/h and space can be made avail-
3.4 10.8 able it may be preferable to provide a 1.5 metre wide
3.3 3.5 10.9 bicycle lane to the right of the kerbside bus lane. This
3,3 3.6 11.0 would normally result in a combined bus/bicycle lane
3.3 3.6 11.1 width of 4.0 - 4.5 metres;
3.3 3.6 11.2
through the sharing of narrow (e.g. minimal width) bus
33 3.6 11.3 lanes under very congested conditions. In general this
3..3 3.6 11.4 approach is only applicable where buses do not stop in
3.3 3.7 11.5 the bus lane; or
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
3A 3.7 11,6
where the speed of buses is relatively high (up to say
3.5 3.7 11.7
80 km/h) a shared lane 4.5 to 5.0 metres wide is nec-
3.6 3.7 11.8
essary so that cyclists and buses can safely overtake
4.5 3.7 3.7 11.9
each other within the lane.
Table 4-6: Dimensional Layout for 6 Lane Divided Roads The following factors need to be considered in choosing
the most appropriate solution for a route:
Total V
Central e
(Ona $ the preferences of cyclists who use the route;
3.9 3.0 3.0 12.9 the speed of buses and other traffic;
3,9 3.0 3.0 3.1 13.0
the location of bus stops;
3.9 3.0 3.0 3.2 13.1
3.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 13.2 the frequency with which buses stop in a length of
3.9 3.1 3.1 3.2 13.3 road; and
3.9 3.1 3.1 3.3 13.4
the available width.
3.9 3.1 3.2 3.3 13.5
3.9 3.2 3.2 3.3 13.6 Signs erected to legally define the bus lane should also
4.0 3.2 3,2 3.3 13.7 make it clear that cyclists are permitted to use the lane
4.0 3.2 3.2 3.4 13.8 unless this is covered in State or Territory traffic regulations.
4.0 3.2 3.3 3.4 13.9
4.0 3.3 3.3 3.4 14.0
4.1 3.3 3.3 3.4 14,1
4.5. Supplementary Road Treatments
4.1 3.3 3.3 14.2
4.5.1. Curves & Turns
4.2 3.3 3.5 14.3
43 3.3 33 3.5 144 Figure 4-20 illustrates an example of a bicycle lane treat-
4.4 3.3 3.3 3.5 14.5 ment option to give protection to cyclists at a curve. In this
4.5 3.3 3.3 3.5 14.6 instance a bicycle lane ramps up to the adjoining footpath
4.5 3.3 3.3 3.6 14.7 in order to protect cyclists from rear end/side swipe colli-
sions whilst travelling around the curve.
Table 4-7: Dimensional Layout for 8 Lane Divided Roads
This form of protection should be used in association
Notes (applicable to Table 4-5, Table 4-6 and Table 4-7) with the various bicycle lane facilities (including wide
kerbside lanes). It is usually required so as to protect and
1. Centre lanes should not be less than 3.2 metres on pri- limit stress to cyclists, as a result of traffic passing
mary arterial roads or those roads carrying large vol- cyclists in the same direction, and which is travelling too
umes of heavy traffic, except where traffic characteris- close to cyclists. It is primarily required on the inside of
tics, the road alignment or the environment permit. curves and turns.
ROADS 35
Figure 4-20: Lane Treatment at Curve (Unley, SA) Figure 4-21: Lane Treatment at Curve using Raised Traffic
Island (East Fremantle, WA)
Other forms of protection that are used and effective,
include: the footpath area. It may be appropriate to establish a sep-
arated path treatment (sect. 6.6.2.2).
pavement bar island (refer AS 1742.2);
raised traffic island (refer Figure 4-21); 4.5.2. Lane Channelisation
fully mountable kerbing at the left side of the carriage-
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
way (to the direction of travel of cyclists), to permit The use of channelisation treatments such as continuity
access to the footpath at any point along the length of lines and kerbed projections, in association with bicycle
the kerb; and lane facilities, is recognised as extremely important.
close spaced (e.g. 3 metre intervals) raised pavement Raised treatments are appropriate for bicycle/car parking
markers applied outside of bicycle lanes. lanes. Experience has shown that motor traffic will regu-
larly drive in the area of bicycle lanes in the absence of
There is no information to accurately determine under these treatments, which could be hazardous for cyclists .
what conditions protection is required. Traffic
speed and volumes, commercial traffic, kerb-
side motor traffic lane width, the degree of M
Also bicycle lanes are relatively uncommon in some cities The locations where channelisation should be provided are
and States, and as such the road rules applicable to bicycle shown in Figure 4-22.
lanes are not always known to all members of the driving
public. Channelisation treatments assist the identification 4.5.3. Ramps
of these facilities and reinforce the appropriate use of the
road near bicycle lanes. Ramps linking a road carriageway and a path located in
the area of the roadside verge may be required in associa-
As much as channelling motor traffic, kerbed projections tion with:
also guide the paths of cyclists to the area of the bicycle lane.
protection at curves (sect.
4.5.1);
T
_________________I
narrowing of right turn
lanes (sect. 5.4.2.6); and
4
V
ii
1P I
____
I
1-
Figure 4-23: Road Exit & Entry Ramps - Figure 4-24: Road Exit & Entry Ramps -
Lower Speed Movements Higher Speed Movements
ROADS 37
4.6. Provision for Cyclists on Freeways high bridges where prevailing cross winds and turbu-
lence from large motor vehicles can destabilise
4.6.1. General cyclists;
The main issue that must be addressed in deciding whether weaving areas between on-ramps and off-ramps; and
cyclists may use freeways is road safety. The policy with
respect to cyclists using freeways varies between States getting past vehicles stopped in the emergency stop-
ping lane (i.e. shoulder).
and Territories. Where cyclists are permitted to use a free-
way it is important that they are provided with informa- The prevalence of these conditions on most urban free-
tion, guidance and road conditions which enable them to ways makes it less likely that these routes will be satisfac-
use it safely. It is inappropriate for cyclists to use the tory for cyclists unless substantial treatments are imple-
normal traffic lanes of freeways and so the safe use of free- mented to overcome these problems.
ways by cyclists is predicated on the provision of smooth,
debris-free shoulders of adequate width, and the provision
of safe treatments at interchanges.
4.6.2. Suitability For Use.
Because rural freeways usually have relatively low vol- The following factors should be considered in assessing
umes of traffic leaving and entering at interchange ramps the suitability of a freeway for use by cyclists.
and gradients are normally less than non-freeway arterials,
the freeway should provide a safer and more conve-
cyclists are often able to use them with a high level of
nient route than alternative non-freeway routes;
safety and convenience. Cyclists should normally be
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
allowed to use rural freeways, particularly those having potential for use of the freeway by children should be
sealed shoulders, provided that information is given to low and should also be actively discouraged through
guide them safely across exit and entry ramps. education programs. Such use is likely to be low
because the kinds of trips undertaken by children, short
Where cyclists are permitted to use freeways, and it is
distance trips to school and for recreation, are not well
desired to install devices along the sealed shoulder to alert
served by freeways;
motorists who have inadvertently drifted onto the shoul-
der, the requirements of cyclists should be taken into sealed outer shoulders are essential on freeways which
account in the design of such devices. carry heavy volumes of motor vehicles and significant
The use of urban freeways by cyclists is a matter to be numbers of cyclists. In such situations and where the
determined by the relevant State or Territory road authori- prevailing traffic speeds are 100 km/h a 3.0 metre wide
ty or government which may decide to deny cyclists' shoulder is desirable but a minimum width of 2.0
access to specific freeways because of the difficulties and metres may be used, particularly at squeeze points.
hazards which would confront them in high volume, high Where a section of freeway has an 80 km/h speed zone
speed traffic environments. However, the provision of the corresponding widths are 2.0 metres and 1.5
paths for cyclists within freeway reserves is common, par- metres. Cyclists should not, however, be denied access
ticularly where there is some potential for the use of the to relatively low volume rural freeways which have
freeway by children. On the other hand, there will be narrower sealed shoulders or unsealed crushed rock
instances where the only reasonable alternative arterial shoulders unless there is a convenient and attractive
route is less safe, or is perceived to be less safe, than a free- alternate route;
way. There will be other instances where a freeway is able ramp volumes should be such that adequate gaps occur
to provide an important link in a principal bicycle network. in the traffic stream to allow a safe and convenient
Whilst urban freeways which have 3.0 metre wide sealed crossing of the ramp by cyclists. If volumes are too
shoulders provide a comfortable and reasonably safe envi- high then an alternative route through or around the
ronment for cyclists in mid-block situations the prevailing interchange should be devised;
conditions at many locations give rise to concern about
all ramps should have an outer shoulder at least 1.2
cyclist safety. Locations which are deemed to be unrea-
metres wide, preferably sealed;
sonably hazardous for cyclists include:
ramps exiting and entering the freeway from the right
shoulders which are too narrow, in some instances only
hand lane are likely to be unsuitable for cyclists as they
0.6 metres wide;
have to cross two lanes of high speed traffic to access
off-ramps and on-ramps which carry very heavy vol- them. Alternative routes have to be examined;
umes of high speed traffic throughout the day and night;
a desirable minimum stopping sight distance of 210
sections of freeway where the shoulders are used as metres and an absolute minimum of 150 metres should
bus lanes to provide a relatively high speed express bus be available at locations where cyclists are directed to
service; cross freeway ramps; and
38 BICYCLES
Under special circumstances such as very high traffic gaps of less than 7 seconds) then cyclists should be direct-
volumes or difficult geometry which cause serious ed to use the route illustrated in Figure 4-25(b) or grade
safety hazards, short sections of off-carriageway separation of cyclists should be evaluated. If an on-ramp is
cycling path may need to be provided to enable cyclists controlled by traffic signals then the ability of cyclists to
to by-pass the hazardous area. cross the ramp must be evaluated in relation to the signal
cycle and phasing and other traffic movements which may
4.6.3. Treatments At Interchanges not be controlled by signals.
Figure 4-28 illustrates minimum typical treatments which However, at many rural interchanges where the number of
should generally be used if it is desired to formalise an at- cyclists is low only signs will be necessary.
grade crossing of a freeway ramp. Figure 4-29 shows a
A number of signs relating specifically to cyclists are
more substantial treatment where channelisation is provid-
desirable to regulate, warn and direct cyclists using free-
ed behind the concrete ramp nose. It may be necessary to ways, particularly in passing through interchanges. Where
provide a lesser treatment if special site conditions exist cyclists are prohibited from using a freeway a sign should
(e.g. a narrow island at the nose) but the principle of be erected at all entry ramps to advise cyclists of the pro-
having cyclists cross the ramp at or near right angles with hibition. This sign is likely to include other prohibited
sight distance requirements should not be compromised. classes of vehicle and pedestrians etc.
"V**.
FREEWAY
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
....a
+h 0.6m
dswwms all amund
Figure 4-28: Minimum Typical Treatment for at Grade Crossings at Freeway Ramps
FREE-
..a 0 05 ....5
A./d!!-,r&6: L" I
Where cyclists are permitted to use a freeway it is appro- Figure 4-27 shows the signing recommended to aid
priate to erect signs: cyclists using full diamond interchanges.
at all interchanges to guide cyclists safely across the The geometry of freeway carriageways and ramps will not
ramps or via an alternative route; always be conducive to the economical provision of
underpasses or overpasses at freeway ramps for cyclists.
at entry ramps advising that cyclists are permitted to However, where it is considered that provision of such a
use the freeway; facility is justified designers should refer to Section 7 of
this guide which deals with structures. Figure 4-32 and
adjacent to shoulders advising cyclists to ride as far as
Figure 4-33 illustrate typical underpasses and overpasses
practicable to the left of the shoulder or carriageway;
of freeway ramps.
and
warning motorists that they might encounter cyclists 4.7. Local Area Traffic Management
crossing ramps or on a narrow structure. Schemes
Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) schemes which
42
a) ON RAMP
BICYCLES
FREEWAY
7.4
SECTION A-A
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
0) ON RAMP
b) OFF RAMP
P
ROADS
FREEWAY
FREEWAY
devices with rough or difficult surface conditions for By-passes are likely to be most appropriate in the case of
cyclists, including cobbled surfaces, and the ramps of road closures, or in wide streets where the device creates
some road humps and other raised devices; and a road narrowing and adequate width exists on the depar-
ture enabling cyclists and motor vehicles to share the road
devices located at the bottom of hills, due to the diffi- safely. They are also beneficial to cyclists at road humps
culty of negotiating raised devices with a bicycle in in some instances. Physical measures (e.g. kerbing) are
this circumstance, and to the physical imposition to desirable to prevent motor traffic using by-passes of
cyclists of having to climb a hill from a slow speed. LATM devices.
If a device must be located at the bottom of a hill then a
roundabout or slow point is preferred to more `restrictive' Various devices are discussed below.
devices e.g. a road hump. On gentle gradients, plateau
(a) Roundabouts
style humps are preferred to roundabouts or slow points.
Devices should utilise fully-mountable kerb and channel, Roundabouts are often installed at local street intersections
which is much more forgiving than a stone or concrete to control motor vehicle speeds. The objective of the treat-
barrier kerb, should a cyclist run into it. All devices should ment may be to reduce the number and severity of motor
be adequately lit and marked for safe night-time use. vehicle crashes and/or to improve the amenity of the local
street. In general, at local street roundabouts cyclists are
By-passes or paths for cyclists through devices are a
expected to completely integrate with other road users by
useful means of avoiding the problems listed above.
merging with motor traffic on the approach to the round-
However, where by-passes of traffic management devices
about and taking their turn through the roundabout. If the
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
are provided:
roundabout is designed correctly speeds should be low
the responsible authority must have a commitment to enough to ensure safe integration. Separate channelisation
sweep them frequently, or alternatively the design for cyclists on roundabout approaches is not recommended
must be 'self-cleaning' such that debris from landscap- because of the propensity for left turning motor vehicles to
ing will not accumulate in the cyclists' path; conflict with cyclists travelling through the roundabout.
Roundabouts are discussed in more detail in Section 5.5.2.
they should be designed to provide adequate clearance
to obstacles (e.g. trees and signs); and (b) Slow Points
they should not lead cyclists into hazardous situations Slow points are generally installed at mid block locations.
on the departure side where cyclists may re-join the They may have two lanes, one for each direction of travel,
general traffic flow. or a single lane shared by both directions. As with round-
.or
F TPATH {
I-
abouts cyclists are generally expected to share the road (d) Road Closures
space with motorists. However, where a collector road is
very wide it may be possible and desirable to provide a by- Bicycle paths should be provided through all (partial or
pass of the device as illustrated in Figure 4-35. full) road closures to maintain accessibility and mobility
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
I NP
L
F TPATH
FOOTPATH
I I
R::.ed
tu,
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
5 Road Intersections
demanding task for many people and errors in judgement thus impeding their progress to the stop line whilst the
do occur. In the case of cyclists this is confirmed by crash traffic signals are red, or to the Give Way line in the
records (Federal Office of Road Safety, 1988) which show case of an unsignalised intersection;
that most reported bicycle crashes occur at intersections,
once at the stop line of a signalised intersection
involve cars and are of a serious nature. The most signifi-
cyclists have to stand forward of the stop line (and pos-
cant causes of bicycle/motor vehicle crashes at intersec-
sibly pedestrian crosswalk area) in order to be seen by
tions appear to be:
a motorist waiting at the stop line. This may cause
cyclist not conspicuous or `did not see him' ; inconvenience to pedestrians as well as cyclists;
incorrect perception of intent of cyclist; and cyclists often have difficulty moving from the left lane
to the centre of the road on the approach to the inter-
behaviour of cyclist contrary to anticipated pattern. section in order to turn right;
These causes highlight the need for education of both when performing a conventional right turn at a sig-
motorists and cyclists to encourage better understanding, nalised intersection cyclists have to either travel to the
better conspicuity and hence safer sharing of roads. left of the queue of right turning motorists and can be
However, physical improvement of intersections is also an squeezed' by the opposing right turn movement, or
important part of programs to improve safety for cyclists claim' the right turn lane which is not always easy to
because the presence of a facility, as well as providing do and is sometimes not appreciated by other road
space for cyclists, also heightens motorists awareness of users;
cyclists and enables motorists to better predict the move-
ment of cyclists. motorists sometimes overtake `through' cyclists only
to immediately turn left in front of them risking a col-
In catering for the needs of cyclists, designs should con- lision;
form to the standard approach and principles of traffic
engineering design for all road users. This practice seeks cyclists are vulnerable when travelling through the
to provide traffic facilities which clearly indicate the diverge and merge areas of left turn treatments;
nature and extent of traffic movements and the potential although traffic signals are sophisticated, bicycles are
conflicts. All road users, including cyclists, will benefit often not detected at signalised intersections. The time
from a traffic environment which assists the road user to provided for cyclists to clear intersections can be inad-
anticipate potential conflicts and encourages traffic aware- equate, particularly for large intersections on uphill
ness and predictable behaviour. grades;
At many urban intersections it will be difficult to enable cyclists perceive that roundabouts are unsafe, particu-
the installation of special treatments for bicycles. larly large multi-lane roundabouts, and there is some
However, where space is available road authorities, engi- evidence to suggest that this is the case;
neers, planners and designers should provide them, partic-
ularly where bicycle lanes exist or are proposed on roads traffic turning right across the location of waiting cyclists
passing through the intersection. in an opposing traffic stream (i.e. `corner cutting');
48 BICYCLES
multiple left turn lanes where `through' cyclists need to - less visible form of cyclists (when compared with
travel well out into the carriageway in order to comply motor traffic); and
with their legal obligations; and
- focus of drivers' attention when negotiating inter-
shared right and through lanes (see Table 5-1). section.
- legitimate movements of pedestrians; Table 5-1: Details of Conflicts Illustrated in Figure 5-2
ROAD INTERSECTIONS 49
This section describes the treatments necessary to ade- Bicycle/car parking lanes (sect. 4.4.2) should be treated in
quately provide for cyclists at intersections with a view to the same way as the exclusive bicycle lane shown in Figure
overcoming the types of problems described above. 5-3(b). Where a narrow bicycle lane extends through the
intersection, the continuity line indicates the area in which
The following general treatments are appropriate at intersec- car and bicycle paths are expected to cross. This treatment
tions for each type of traffic lane described in Section 4.4: should be marked whether or not a left turn lane is marked
(with arrows) to encourage cyclists to travel in a pre-
5.3.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes dictable path relative to adjacent motor traffic.
U n gene
0 D
Figure 5-4: Right Turn Treatment Causing `Squeeze' Point Figure 5-6: Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane Treatment (Brighton, SA)
ONE
tAIAY
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
'Craft L ') T
/// 1111111110e
0
74
5.3.6. Shared Traffic Lanes traffic signals will automatically return to that signal
phase. Side roads and right turn phases, however, do not
In these cases insufficient width is available to provide have a permanent demand and those traffic movements are
special treatment for cyclists but traffic management mea- only activated when a vehicle is detected. by the relevant
sures can improve the environment for all road users. pavement detector loop.
Where a traffic lane catering for cyclists cannot be carried Detector loops are used to register the presence of traffic
through an intersection the lane should be terminated at at signalised intersections, and are therefore a common
least 50 metres before the intersection and consideration feature. Pavement inductive loop detectors are the most
should be given to provision of a sign warning motorists common form of detector.
of merging cyclists. The proliferation of such signs may
limit any positive impact and as such it is desirable that the The following aspects are important, in relation to tradi-
signs are deployed only where cyclist volumes are high or tional inductive loop detectors:
where there are particular concerns for the safety of many cyclists are unaware of where to position them-
cyclists.
selves at traffic signals in order to maximise the chance
Where the lane is used by inexperienced cyclists it may be of detection by loop detectors;
desirable to provide the option of a cyclists' path (i.e. in with the growth in composite non-metallic bicycles
the area of the roadside verge) through the intersection. there is some concern that inductive loops will become
increasingly ineffective. Leschinski (1994) found that
5.4. Signalised Intersections loop detectors are relatively poor at detecting cyclists;
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
As most cycling will continue to take place on the road Leschinski also found that detection levels vary for dif-
network the needs of cyclists should be incorporated into ferent types of bicycles at different inductive loop sen-
the design of signalised intersections. Particular attention sitivities. However, in the case of the common
should be paid to cyclists' requirements when traffic lanes `Symmetripole' loop, detection levels for different
are narrowed and exclusive left turn and right turn lanes types of bicycles were reasonably consistent over a
are installed to improve traffic flow on the approaches. range of sensitivities; and
Where a significant number of cyclists use an approach at inductive loop detectors have the advantage that
times when motor traffic demand is low it may be desir- cyclists waiting at traffic signals away from the kerb-
able to install a special push button to enable cyclists to side can be detected.
place a call and/or ensure that the green time is long
The design of traffic signal installations should cater for
enough to allow them to pass through the intersection on a
the detection of bicycles at all legitimate waiting positions
green signal. The button must be placed so that cyclists
(of bicycles) for all phases which do not have a permanent
can conveniently reach it without having to dismount.
demand.
Generally the features discussed in the following sections
Varying preferences for alternative forms of detection of
would cater for experienced and competent cyclists and
cyclists have been expressed by different State road
should be incorporated into intersection designs. These
authorities. The following forms of detection are available.
features should not be seen as a satisfactory solution for
the young and less experienced cyclist who should be (a) Road markings to Assist Detection
encouraged through education programs to dismount and
use pedestrian facilities, or to choose alternative routes The markings illustrated in Figure 5-8 and Figure 5-9
along local streets. Such alternative routes should have a assist the detection of cyclists at traditional loop detectors
suitable surface and gradients and not add excessively to by highlighting the appropriate position at which cyclists
trip distance. should wait in order to maximise the chances of detection.
Some problems have been experienced with the use of
5.4.1. Bicycle Detection At Traffic Signals these markings. On occasions they are not reinstated after
road resurfacing.
In order for cyclists to satisfactorily and legally use traffic
signals it is necessary that detection equipment is capable Also, maintenance of the markings is sometimes poor due
of detecting bicycles. Unfortunately at many sites this is to the installation of the markings on side roads under the
not the case, leaving cyclists with the inconvenient alter- responsibility of a local authority, at a Main Road author-
native of having to ride on to the footpath and use the ity intersection. Such problems are exacerbated as a result
pedestrian push buttons. When faced with this alternative, of the small size or lack of availability of the markings.
cyclists may choose to disobey the law and proceed Therefore special attention is needed to ensure the mark-
against a red signal. ings are properly maintained.
Generally the major road at an intersection will have a per- This option is also affected by the performance limitations
manent demand programmed into the controller so that the of inductive detectors as discussed above.
52 BICYCLES
6 diamond markings
(100nm x 100mm)
at 300mm as.
Sync
-See irtSet
1-90M
t,90m
(d) Other Forms of Detection where the detector (say push button) is located such
that cyclists need to move forward of the stop bar.
The disadvantages of the push button actuator when
cyclists are positioned away from the kerbside, and of loop In some situations it is desirable to locate detectors in
detectors in relation to non-metallic bicycles, have advance of intersections to minimise the delay to cyclists.
prompted calls for alternative methods of detection. This can result in a dramatic improvement in the `level of
Alternatives include infra-red, microwave and video based service' for cyclists at signalised intersections.
detection systems. These are not widely used and there-
fore road authorities are encouraged to trial such systems.
5.4.2. Signalised Intersection Treatments
(e) Other Considerations 5.4.2.1. Approach Lane Widths
Care should be exercised in the application of detectors of Kerbside lanes on the approaches to signalised intersec-
any type. They should not be installed where cyclists need tions should be 4.0 - 4.5 metres wide to enable cyclists to
to wait in a potentially hazardous or illegal position. The pass through the intersection without being squeezed or
following situations should be avoided: causing disruption to motor traffic and to enable special
lanes to be marked where appropriate.
where a separate left turn phase/arrow exists and the
cyclist `through' movement detector is located at the However, where narrow traffic lanes have been provided
left side of the carriageway. to improve traffic capacity or flow, experienced cyclists
have to share the lane with motor traffic, defending their
For instance, a `through' cyclist may be waiting in con-
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
This is similar to the more common but specific exam- Where a wide approach lane can be provided it is desirable
ple given in the point above, however it applies to other to provide approach and stand up lanes for cyclists to
movements. An example is a right turning cyclist in a enable them to pass queued motor vehicles in advancing to
shared right and through lane, waiting in conflict with the stop line. These lanes should be at least 1.2 metres
motor traffic moving with a `through' traffic signal wide and marked with a bicycle pavement symbol and
phase; and appropriate arrow to encourage correct lane discipline.
Figure 5-11: Bicycle Lanes at Signalised Intersections Also Showing Advanced Stop Lines
54 BICYCLES
Such a treatment will also benefit motorists in terms of In practice many cyclists intending to turn right ride to the
improved traffic flow. left of motor vehicles which are turning or intending to
turn right in order to avoid conflict with this traffic stream.
An example of bicycle stand up lanes is shown in Figure This means that they may be exposed to conflict with
5-11. The through lane for bicycles marked within the left `through' motor traffic. The right turn bicycle lane shown
turn lane is required to enable cyclists to legally ride on in Figure 5-11 creates space for cyclists, providing protec-
this area of road pavement. It also enables through bicy- tion from moving motor vehicles and enabling cyclists to
cles to advance to the head of a stationary queue. In prac- easily advance to the head of the right turning queue.
tice, without such a lane through cyclists choose either to
ride within the left turn lane in contravention of the law or It is acknowledged that there may be situations where it is
ride within the through lane and are placed at greater risk difficult for cyclists to safely cross to the centre of the road
because of the speed of traffic and the presence of the on the intersection approach. In these cases cyclists, par-
intersection. The minimum lane width remaining for ticularly the inexperienced, may choose to perform a
motorists should be 2.5 metres which is the absolute min- `hook' or `box' turn which is discussed in Section 5.4.2.4.
imum required for cars. A disadvantage of this lane width Although double left and double right turn lanes are diffi-
is that cyclists turning left will have to join any moving cult for cyclists to negotiate a similar treatment to that
stream of left turning motor traffic. If space can be made shown in Figure 5-11 may be provided in these cases in
available this lane should be 3.7 metres wide, effectively order to indicate to motorists that cyclists have a right to
providing a wide kerbside lane for left turning cyclists. ride through the diverge area.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Another variation of a stand-up lane is shown in Figure Where a bicycle lane is provided on an intersection
5-15(c). This may be appropriate where a bicycle lane approach which has a left turn slip lane the continuity
between intersections is located at the kerbside, and a high (dashed) line marking the bicycle lane should be contin-
volume of left turn motor traffic or an exclusive left turn ued as shown in Figure 5-12 to indicate to the left turning
phase, exists at an intersection. motorists that they are crossing a bicycle lane.
- - -
- -
I
'4
'4
____
II
I I
a
I
I
I
II
I.
'4
I I
I I
*
*
.4
11
I!
56
BICYCLES
0111sets to
n9 esuians:
1 1
STEP I with
north south
green phase
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
I
H
-
/ /,'
I
\\
,
1
I
I
k
-1
5.4.2.6. Narrowing at Right Turn Lane designation of the footpath as a shared footway. This
should be regarded as a last resort. This option is not
Measures implemented to alleviate traffic congestion and usually appropriate in shopping centres or near
improve traffic flow on arterial roads often involve the pro- schools, hospitals or other places where high pedestri-
vision of right turn lanes at critical intersections in what are an activity occurs. A typical treatment is illustrated in
called `5 lane' or isolated `S' treatments. However, the right
Figure 5-20; and
turn lanes are often achieved by narrowing the through
lanes and this creates squeeze points for cyclists if the above options are not possible then cyclists will
have to defend their lane through the intersection or an
Depending on the pavement width (existing or able to be alternative route for cyclists may be developed and
constructed), the following options should be considered sign posted.
in the design and construction of new treatments, or at
existing intersections for overcoming the `squeeze point' 5.4.2.7. Through Access at Junctions
problem for cyclists:
In order to limit the delay to cyclists at junctions, circum-
provision of an exclusive bicycle lane which may be stances may permit the construction of a `through' lane (or
the continuation of a mid-block bicycle lane or an path) for cyclists opposite the discontinuing leg of a junc-
short section on either side of the carriageway as tion, as shown in Figure 5-21.
shown in Figure 5-18;
This treatment may be appropriate where:
At locations where the existing lane widths are less property access does not exist opposite the discontinu-
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
than 3.0 metres the exclusive bicycle lane may be pro- ing leg of the junction;
vided by relocation, narrowing or removal of a raised
median or narrowing of a footpath; pedestrian activity in the vicinity of the junction is lim-
ited and the number of pedestrian crossing movements
At locations where the existing lane widths are 3.4 of the bicycle path is low;
metres they may be narrowed to 3.0 metres (minimum)
to provide bicycle lanes; the proportion of elderly, visually impaired and other
disabled pedestrians is low; and
provision of wide kerbside lanes. Five lane treatments where a bicycle lane exists on both sides of the junc-
similar to that illustrated in Figure 5-19 are often tion, on the relevant side of the road.
provided by narrowing other traffic lanes which creates
a squeeze point for cyclists. Wherever practicable a Whilst numerous options exist, the sign and delineation
wide kerbside lane should be provided through these details shown in Figure 5-21 represents one solution that
treatments; could be used.
'1:
Physical separation between the bicycle path and the prin- `Intersection Crossing Time') to enable cyclists to safely
cipal road carriageway is desirable at the junction and clear intersections.
should be achieved through the use of kerbing or a raised
island. The following alternative responses could also be consid-
ered:
Designers must ensure the safety of pedestrians is not
compromised. It may be appropriate to establish a sepa- i) Install a special push button actuator located in
rated path treatment (sect. 6.6.2.2) where the bicycle path advance of the relevant intersection approach or other
is raised and adjacent to the footpath. form of detection, to enable passing cyclists to push
the button or actuate the detector, in order to extend
Where the through access lane passes over a pedestrian specific phase times.
crossing, the crossing should be designated in a manner
that is consistent with local practice and should incorpo- Note, there is some concern that this method would
rate one or a combination of the following: give rise to expectations by cyclists which if not met
could result in a hazardous situation for cyclists.
Zebra crossing (refer AS 1742.10); However such a circumstance is similar to those at
large intersections where the intersection crossing time
Raised platform; and/or
for cyclists is insufficient.
Give way controls.
ii) A `yellow' cyclist lantern would switch on to warn
The width of the separator (island or otherwise) should cyclists to stop before other traffic within a specific
account for the pedestrian crossing demand.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
The time to travel from the point of entry at an intersec- (c) Intersection Crossing Time Calculation
tion, to a conflict point is dependent on the location of that
conflict point, which in turn is dependent on the paths of The intersection crossing time is the period it takes a
traffic. The problem is therefore phase specific. Hence, all cyclist to pass through the `intersection conflict zone',
movements should be checked to confirm minimum inter- from the point of entering a signalised intersection (from
green times for various phases. the stop bar) to the last point of conflict with another legal
movement of traffic (including pedestrians).
(b) Treatment Alternatives
In order to provide a safe crossing period, the 15th
Signal phasing and/or green or intergreen times, should be Percentile crossing speed of cyclists should be used. In the
adjusted utilising the information provided below to event that such provision is unattainable, the median (50th
ensure that a sufficient period of time exists (e.g. Percentile) speed should be used.
ROAD INTERSECTIONS 61
The following aspects need to be considered in the deter- speeds at signalised intersections. If free flow condi-
mination of the Intersection Crossing Time: tions do not exist it would be appropriate to either
assume no gradient exists or to measure the speed of
Cyclist Travelling at Speed (refer Table 5-2) - to enable cyclists. The affect of gradients is applied in the same
the setting of intergreen times under normal conditions manner as `Cyclists Travelling at Speed' above.
where a cyclist enters the intersection at the time that
the `yellow' lamp appears. In assessing uphill grades, the approach road conditions
must be considered. Long and steep gradients in advance
of an intersection may be such that cyclists would not
Speed (km/h)
I ................
have recovered physically by the time they cross the inter-
[Median 25 section, and hence their speed will be relatively slow.
I
15'' Percentile 20 The effect of wind on the speed of cyclists may also be
important in some locations.
Source: Shepherd 1994; Dorrestyn & Co., 1998
Table 5-2 : Cyclists' Speed at Traffic Signals There is limited information available to determine the
speed of cyclists for uphill gradients and wind. An
Cyclist Travelling from Rest (refer Figure 5-22) - to approach reported in CROW (1993) can be used, from
ensure the combination of the green and intergreen which the speed of cyclists is calculated based on the
time is sufficient for a cyclist accelerating from rest (at power output of cyclists and the various forces of resis-
the stop bar) in order to clear the intersection safely. tance. Alternatively, where the uphill gradient is in excess
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
hand side of the left turn lane to a point opposite the island
before crossing the slip lane at right angles.
high entry angle left slip lanes, which also provide for carriageway must, somehow, weave through the high
improved visibility of cyclists as well as other traffic; volume of left turning traffic. If an exclusive bicycle lane is
and provided between the auxiliary lane and the adjacent
through lane cyclists will be sandwiched between fast
limiting the radius of left slip lanes.
moving through traffic on the right and accelerating traffic
An alternative treatment for inexperienced cyclists would on the left. They will have to pass through the merge area,
be to provide a short section of shared path. the location where the left turning traffic is travelling
fastest. An alternative treatment that might be considered is
Selection of an appropriate treatment depends on the road
shown in Figure 5-26. This treatment requires cyclists to
space available and the type of cyclist being catered for
cross the slip lane close to the intersection where the speed
(e.g. children, inexperienced commuter). A treatment for
of left turning motor vehicles is lower, and enter a protect-
experienced cyclists is illustrated in Figure 5-24.
ed bicycle lane similar to that shown in Figure 5-27. As
In some instances, and particularly where child cyclists there is no need to yield to a cyclist, motor vehicles may
are present or there are large pedestrian volumes, it may be flow freely into the auxiliary lane.
I
Alternative treatment
for inexperien
cyclists (shared path)
ii
Consideration should be given ,_...
to reconstructing the slip lane
to intersect at a higher angle
$ cycle P t Symbol
i t
II
Figure 5-26: Treatment of Free Flow Left Turn Lane
roundabouts with a low bicycle volume and high traf- There is substantial concern amongst cycling groups at the
fic volume have been found to be less safe for cyclists. use of the `Alberta' style of line marking (where circulat-
This is pertinent to conditions in Australia where ing area lane lines join roundabout exit lane lines)
cyclists are relatively few in number. throughout Australia at multi lane roundabouts. Various
studies are reasonably consistent in demonstrating that the
5.5.2.2. Options for the Treatment of Roundabouts predominant crash type is right angle incidents between
entering motor-vehicles and circulating cyclists.
Jordan (1985) recommended the installation of large well Therefore, it remains to be seen whether or not the safety
designed splitter islands, the careful positioning of signs of cyclists will deteriorate as a result of these markings.
and vegetation (to minimise the chance of obscuring a
cyclist), and that appropriate attention is given to approach Simultaneously, there is also concern for the safety of
deflection and adequate lighting. cyclists who attempt to turn right or travel across a round-
about exit where `Alberta' markings exist. Where a signif-
Visibility is a significant issue, and complex in relation to icant demand for these movements exists at a roundabout
cyclists. In some investigations (Hughes, 1998) higher designated with `Alberta' style markings, alternative pro-
rates of cyclist crashes at roundabouts have been reported vision for cyclists should be made.
where visibility was by normal standards at a high level. It
was also found that those rates reduced when sight dis- As a well established principle of bicycle planning, solu-
tances were reduced. The mechanics of visibility at inter- tions to roundabout problems involving cyclists are
sections and the perceptual limitations of drivers are such unlikely to be solved through attempts to divert the paths
that cyclists are easily missed when observations are made of cyclists, unless for instance, the convenience, travel
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
at higher speeds, which occur with high standard sight time and safety of cyclists, particularly during peak traffic
conditions. What constitutes the optimum level of visibil- periods, are all improved as a result. Similarly, it should
ity is unknown. In the absence of more exacting research, not be assumed that all cyclists will divert to alternative
it may be appropriate to achieve sight distances that corre- (separate perimeter) paths of access around roundabouts
spond to the minimum standard required by AUS- where these are provided.
TROADS Part 6.
5.5.2.3. Approach - Small Single Lane Roundabouts
The results of various studies have indicated that a sepa-
rated cycle path, located outside of the circulating car- Specific provision is not generally required at single lane
riageway, was the safest design in the presence of large roundabouts (refer Figure 5-28) with a central island
vehicle flows (Brude & Larsson, 1997). CROW 10 (1994) diameter less than 25 metres, or where vehicles speeds are
indicates off-road cycleways should be constructed at less than 50 km/h.
roundabouts with a traffic volume in excess of 10000 vehi-
cles per day and also at all large (central island diameter in At local street roundabouts cyclists are expected to inte-
excess of 25m) roundabouts, primarily due to speed con- grate with other road users by merging with motor traffic
siderations. on the approach to the roundabout and taking their turn
through the roundabout. Because of the small scale of
Separate cycle paths have been found to be safer than a these roundabouts entering motorists should readily see
bicycle lane within the road carriageway, particularly at cyclists on the circulating roadway.
highly trafficked roundabouts (Van Minnen, Brude &
Larsson).
5.5.2.4. Approach - Other Roundabouts instances and particularly in the case of large round-
abouts, it would be desirable for the path to be two-way,
Special provision for cyclists is desirable where: in order to provide cyclists with a convenient choice of
the cumulative, approach traffic volume, exceeds access to the road carriageway, and hence encourage as
10000 vehicles per day; many cyclists as possible to use the facility;
multi lane roundabouts occur, and certainly where where separate provision is not possible, the use of
vehicle speeds exceed 50 km/h through the round- footpaths located adjacent to the roundabout may be
about; or appropriate, as illustrated in Figure 5-29. It shows a
treatment whereby cyclists may move between the
the central roundabout island diameter exceeds 25m. road and path via properly designed ramps (sect.
6.7.3.3). Fencing or landscaping between the path and
A combination of these factors (i.e. volume, multi-lane,
speed, size) should be considered as well as others includ-
carriageway, is necessary to prevent 'ride-out' (Cross
and Fisher, 1977);
ing sight distances and sight lines when designing for
cyclist safety.
the full-time signalisation of one or all entries to a
The following treatment is appropriate, where `special roundabout, depending on the predominant paths of
provision' should be made: cyclists and other traffic, or on the crash history;
the provision of a path of access for cyclists separated in the case of very large roundabouts on busy roads
from the road carriageway as shown in Figure 5-29 and consideration should be given to providing a controlled
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
detailed in Figure 5-30, as an alternative to the use of crossing on critical approaches, or grade separation
the road carriageway at the roundabout. In most where cyclist demand is very high.
abutting development
'
t//"
v2'
.
road
Every effort should be made to ensure approach entry In such cases designers should consider and evaluate other
deflection angles and through path design envelope will alternative treatments for the intersection in order to pro-
limit vehicle speeds at roundabouts, despite any other vide suitable access for cyclists.
measures for the benefit of cyclists.
Where it is proposed to construct separate perimeter paths
Other situations where special consideration of cyclists is around the outside of roundabouts, or where shared use
required to assist access and safety include: paths would exist around roundabouts, consideration of
pedestrian movements is required to ensure that any
at roundabouts used by a significant number of cyclists potential conflicts are addressed. With reference to Figure
or where a safety problem has developed, considera- 5-30, where the perimeter path crosses a road, there is
tion should be given to the provision of a sign rein- some concern in relation to the safety of cyclists (and
forcing the message that motorists must look out for pedestrians) with respect to exiting traffic in particular.
and give way to cyclists moving around the round- Consideration should be given to installation of a con-
about. The sign shown in Figure 9-19 can be used in trolled crossing should a safety problem develop at a
conjunction with the standard regulatory `Roundabout' crossing location.
sign; In proposing the use of a larger roundabout road authori-
ties, engineers, planners and designers should account for
by-pass of three legged roundabouts for cyclists travel- the safety implications to cyclists as well as the safety ben-
ling straight through the intersection; efits to motorists and their passengers. It may be prefer-
able at locations used by a significant number of cyclists
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
where the skew of intersections necessitates provision and pedestrians to adopt a signalised intersection.
of a left turn slip lane on the corner of a roundabout;
and It would be desirable to disseminate information in the
community providing advice to cyclists on how to negoti-
where a major motor vehicle movement is able to by- ate any roundabout (Allott & Lomax), and to highlight to
pass the roundabout at speed. all road users the problems for cyclists at roundabouts.
t
Alternative service road ter-
minal where necessitated
by abutting development
b) Termination at major intersection
6.1. General Users with Disabilities (vision, hearing mobility, & cogni-
tively impaired users):
Paths are often constructed through reserves, or along pedestrians;
rivers or coastal areas, and thus offer pleasant and the least sporting users;
stressful of conditions for cycling. As such they play a crit- manual wheelchair users; and
ical role in recreational cycling. electric wheelchair/scooter users.
They present ideal environments for children, adult 'learn- Small-Wheeled Vehicle Users:
ers' and others to improve their cycling in the absence of children's pedal/motorised/electric cars;
motor traffic. in-line skaters;
skate boarders;
Conversely paths can have a critical transportation role
roller skaters; and
where, for instance, they form part of a strategic bicycle
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
foot scooters.
route, or are used to avoid limitations caused by discon-
tinuous access along roads, excessive gradients or unde- Others:
sirable traffic conditions (also see Figure 6-15). organised events;
maintenance workers;
Paths can offer a safe functional design suitable for use by
horse riders; and
a variety of cyclist categories and purposes where there is:
anglers.
a professional approach to planning and implementa-
If the facility is intended for use by commuter cyclists then
tion;
it should follow a direct route to a popular destination, be
an appreciation of the need for appropriate geometric wide and have a horizontal and vertical alignment which
design and layout; and allows safe, high speed bicycle travel. Rail reserves and
river banks can offer an opportunity to provide a high
recognition of the dynamic nature of cycling. quality commuter path. Provision of an exclusive bicycle
path can often, but not always, mean that a separate paral-
6.2. Characteristics of Use lel facility has to be provided to meet the demands of
pedestrians and other potential users.
Where sufficient demand exists, paths should be provided
for the exclusive use of cyclists and pedestrians. Separated Because cyclist demand is often relatively low, the cost of
paths may reduce the potential for conflict and allow the paths significant and many paths provide useful and
bicycle path section to operate at a reasonable speed. attractive links for pedestrians, there has been a tendency
for 'shared-use' paths to be provided rather than exclusive
An indication of the extent of other users normally found bicycle paths. Whilst this enables the maximum benefit to
on shared use paths may be gathered from the following be derived from these facilities, conflict does occur
list. The categories include: between cyclists and other users, particularly pedestrians,
and this has become an issue on some busy paths. For this
Pedestrians:
reason a `Separated Path' which divides the operating
children; space for each use, or where completely separate facilities
elderly; are provided, may be appropriate where both cyclist and
people pushing prams & strollers; pedestrian (or other user) demands are heavy.
family groups;
dog walkers; and In some States or Territories cyclists are permitted to ride
joggers. on footpaths whereas in others footpaths must be signed as
shared use paths before cyclists are able to use them legal-
Cyclists (refer Section 2.3 also): ly. The issue of footpath cycling is one that must be
children; addressed by the individual authorities responsible for
families; traffic regulation.
adults;
individuals & groups; and Although they can be designed for high speeds, many
power assisted bicycles. paths are not used by inter-suburb distance commuter
70 BICYCLES
cyclists. This is mainly due to cyclists inability to travel bicycle, purpose of the trip, age of the cyclist, condition of
constantly at the relatively high speed attainable on the surface, alignment standard of facility, gradients, widths,
road system, and because paths often do not lead to useful path user volumes and prevailing weather conditions.
destinations. Indirect paths bring cyclists into conflict with
other users, and cause them to have to yield at side streets. It is important to recognise that, given appropriate condi-
tions, many fit cyclists can maintain relatively high
These factors can result in speeds being low and overall speeds. Speeds of 35 km/h can be maintained on the flat
travel times being relatively long, and unattractive to com- whilst speeds of over 50 km/h can be attained on moder-
muter cyclists. Thus paths should not be regarded as a sub- ate gradients.
stitute for adequately designing roads for travel by bicycle.
It is recommended that paths be designed for a speed of 30
In designing an off-carriageway facility for bicycles, the km/h (Shepherd, 1994) where possible and desirable given
designer should first determine the purpose of the cycling the purpose of the path, and otherwise for the anticipated
path. The purpose of a path is best assessed through con- operating speeds.
sideration of the potential, likely and desired use of the
path amongst the various categories of cyclists. However, it should be recognised that it may be necessary
Predominantly, a path for cycling may either lead to spe- to adopt higher or lower design speeds in specific circum-
cific destinations (a commuter path) or offer a pleasant stances. For example, it is desirable to provide a high stan-
ride (a recreational path). dard curve at the bottom of a steep downgrade but design-
ers may be forced to adopt tight curves in providing a path
With reference to Section 6.4, the detailed designs of com-
down the face of an escarpment.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Crashes and even fatalities occur on paths and may be the 6.3.2. Horizontal Curvature
result of high density use or, as a result of the mixed use
by leisure and commuting traffic. Careful consideration of Where a path location or alignment is not constrained by
separated paths for differing user needs may be required to topography or other physical features, a generous align-
minimise risk within limited budgets. ment consisting of straights and large radius curves is
desirable. Such an alignment will provide good sight lines
and a pleasant riding experience for cyclists. A minimum
radius of at least 30 metres is generally preferred.
6.3. Path Design Criteria for Bicycles It should be noted that there will be circumstances where
the speed environment along a path or a section of path is
The vertical and horizontal alignment (and combinations of high and as above, Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 should be used
these), width of path and clearances adopted, are vital to as a guide for the choice of radii in those circumstances.
the safe operation of a path. Paths attract a variety of users
from experienced commuter cyclists to young children Design Speed (k Minimum Radius (metres)
(sect. 2.3 and 6.2) and hence it is desirable to consider the
characteristics of all likely users when designing a path . 20 10
Bicycle operating speeds on paths are influenced by a com- Table 6-1: Minimum Radii of Horizontal Curves
bination of human and other factors including the type of (without Superelevation)
PATHS 71
would be required either through the provision of addi- tant to know whether the path is likely to be used by
tional path width (minimum width of 1.8 - 2.0 metres in service vehicles.
each direction), or through passing on the side of the path
with opposing flow provided sufficient opportunities exist. d) Clearances (see sect. 6.3.5) - represent a critical con-
sideration in the assessment of path width requirements.
6.3.4. Width of Paths However, for the purpose of determining path widths, it
is reasonable for some clearance allowances (e.g.
The width of paths is an important factor given construc-
between users) to be ignored where paths are subject to
tion costs and operational considerations. It can also have
low use or where path traffic flows are tidal. This is rea-
a significant bearing on the level of convenience and con-
sonable on the basis that path users meet infrequently
flict between users (sect. 6.6.1), and potentially on path
and therefore the potential for conflict is limited.
safety as well.
The process of choosing the width of a path is subjective e) User `envelopes' - includes the operating width of
in most instances given that the path would not be in exis- cyclists (see Figure 3-1), pedestrians and others. Note,
tence at the time of the path design, and as such it is likely the presence of couples walking side by side is a
that little relevant information would be available on its common occurrence along paths used for recreation,
use. Therefore some basic assumptions need to be made and one which is commonly associated with the high-
anticipating the nature of use of the path. A number of est demand for path width. For the purpose of deter-
issues should be considered, including: mining path widths, the design envelope can be taken
as 1.0 metre wide for pedestrians (AUSTROADS, Part
a) Level of pedestrian and bicycle use - paths can expe- 13), and 1.5 metres wide for a pedestrian couple.
rience significant use:
where they are located within urban areas, near The issues and advice provided above are a guide only.
schools or other major bicycle or pedestrian trip More exacting methods are available in relation to some of
generators; the issues. Other local issues and constraints may also
exist and may need to be considered. Specific assessment
where they provide an opportunity for recreation should be made in each case.
and exercise;
In general the stated issues have been considered in the
due to visual and other attractions; or development of the path treatment widths listed in this
where they provide useful connections within a chapter (see Figure 6-19, Figure 6-25 and Figure 6-28).
comprehensive bicycle network.
Separate consideration should be given to the varying cir-
However the capacity of even a common 3 metre path is cumstances of use of paths that exist on weekends and
significant and rarely exceeded due to path traffic volumes weekdays. For instance, lower bicycle speeds are conceiv-
alone, and therefore in most instances detailed considera- able during weekends along paths having recreational
tion of path traffic volumes is not required. value, which are used for commuting on weekdays.
72 BICYCLES
6.3.5. Clearances for use on paths. However, in practice there are cases
where it is not feasible to achieve a 3% maximum and
Adequate horizontal clearance between bicycle operating the designer has no choice but to adopt a steeper gra-
spaces and fixed objects is important for safe operation. dient; and
The horizontal clearance varies according to the type of
use and operating speeds as follows: in cases where 3% cannot be achieved consider limit-
ing gradient to a maximum of about 5% and providing
a desirable lateral clearance of 1.0 metre is required short flatter sections (say 20 metres long) at regular
between bicycle operating spaces because of the high intervals to give cyclists travelling both uphill and
relative speed which exists when cyclists approach one
downhill some relief from the gradient (although many
another from opposite directions at speeds of 30 km/h cyclists are opposed to this approach, preferring a con-
or more (i.e. closing speed of 60 km/h); sistent gradient).
on recreational paths and shared use paths where the
It is sometimes difficult to achieve the above gradients
speeds of most cyclists are generally about 20 km/h, a
where a path follows a river and a connection between
minimum lateral clearance of 0.4 metres is necessary
paths must be achieved in the vicinity of a steep escarp-
between bicycle operating spaces;
ment. It should also be noted that a long uphill grade pre-
a lateral clearance of 1.0 metres (0.5 metres minimum) ceded by a downgrade is more acceptable than one pre-
should be provided between the edge of any path for ceded by a flat or slightly rising grade.
cycling and any obstacle, which if struck may result in
Note, with regard to Figure 6-2, gradients and the associ-
cyclists losing control or being injured;
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Desirable
6.3.6. Gradient
140
As a general principle longitudinal gradients on paths for
adient (m)
Where paths are for shared use, the needs of other path
users should be considered. AS 1428 has specific require-
ments relating to the longitudinal gradient of paths. For 60
i
further details on pedestrian facilities and requirements
AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians, should be consulted. 40
20
6.3.6.1. Ease of Uphill Travel
In using the figure designers should understand that: Preferred maximum gradient for downhill safety
include commuter and sporting cyclists. Otherwise, the not be provided at the bottom of steep grades, except in
`desirable' line in the figure is recommended. extreme circumstances. If these cannot be avoided then it
is important that adequate sight distances be provided on
Consideration of the following factors is also important: all approaches.
cyclists' speeds on approach to an uphill section;
6.3.7. Sight Distance
exposure to wind; and
For safe travel cyclists must be able to see across the
width of path - where the gradients provided in the inside of horizontal curves and over vertical crest curves a
figure cannot be achieved it may be desirable to widen sufficient distance to enable them to stop or take evasive
the path to cater for the sideways displacement of bicy- action if necessary to avoid another cyclist, a pedestrian or
cles being ridden uphill, or to allow for cyclists walk- an obstacle in their path.
ing side by side.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
6.3.6.2. Safety and Downhill Travel on Paths Figure 6-6 gives stopping sight distances required to
enable a cyclist to stop for various combinations of bicy-
State Bicycle Committee of Victoria (1987b) states: cle operating speeds and gradients. The table is based on a
`Many existing bicycle facilities have gradients coefficient of friction of 0.25 and a perception/reaction
which require riding skills beyond those of most time of 2.5 seconds. The eye height of the cyclist is
assumed to be 1.4 metres and the object height is assumed
recreational and child cyclists when they are riding
down the grade. ........... As a guide, a gradient to be zero to recognise that impediments to bicycle travel
exist at pavement level.
greater than 10% over 50 m with horizontal curves
or a gradient of 12% over 50 m on a straight path Paths should be designed and constructed to provide the
is considered to be extremely hazardous.' greatest sight distance possible at any given location.
However, there has in fact been limited comprehensive The stopping sight distance to be used in the geometric
research to determine what constitutes the maximum design of paths should be at least equal to that shown in
downhill grade, in terms of cyclist safety. It is known that Figure 6-6, and in particular should be used:
cyclists have been seriously injured because they have lost
control of bicycles on steep downgrades and run into for intersection design;
obstacles off the path. in setting out the alignment of paths;
in relation to the positioning of terminals and
It is recommended that gradients steeper than 5% should not handrails;
be provided unless it is unavoidable. It is also most impor- at entries to underpasses;
tant that sharp horizontal curves or fixed objects do not exist for landscaping in the field; and
near the bottom of hills, particularly where the approach gra- otherwise as required to ensure the safety of path users.
dient is steep (greater than 5%) and relatively straight.
Note, path sight distances can be drastically reduced by
If a curve must be provided at the bottom of a steep grade the growth of vegetation and hence their maintenance is
then consideration should be given to providing addition- critical (see Figure 6-4).
al path width, and a clear escape route or recovery area
adjacent to the outside of the path curve. Figure 6-5 illustrates the relationship between stopping
sight distance, radius of the curve and the lateral clearance
Intersecting paths, underpass access points and other cir- to significant visibility obstructions such as extensive veg-
cumstances that may result in conflict for cyclists, should etation or an earth embankment. Isolated features including
74 BICYCLES
trees do not necessarily constitute a significant obstruction in opposite directions around a curve. Where such provi-
if cyclists can see most of the curve beyond them. sion is impractical, one or a combination of the following
may be appropriate:
Whilst the figures referred to above are exacting guides in
the determination of sight distance requirements, in many widening of path;
instances it may be convenient to seek a minimum sight
warning signs; or
distance of say, 30 metres. Such a dimension could be pro-
vided to works staff to be used to assess the need for rou- tactile linework.
tine maintenance operations and the like.
A vertical curve should join all changes of grade. Crest ver-
Where a path is narrow and the level of use of a path is tical curves must be of sufficient length to give the cyclist
high such that cyclists may be expected to travel in both the stopping sight distance shown in Figure 6-6. Sag curves
directions across the width at coincident periods (i.e. 'non- should, where practicable, be the same length as equivalent
tidal' flow), it may be desirable in some instances to cal- crest curves to ensure comfort and a good appearance.
culate lateral clearances on horizontal curves based on the Figure 6-7 shows the minimum length of vertical curve for
sum of the stopping sight distances for cyclists travelling various changes of gradient and design speeds.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Pot of cyast
pa th ) ,
NOTE; L of sight is
600mm dove cwtm line of
Im, point of
cs ion. Obs ton
c ca
2
T-f
1
I
117
l z 8.120
16.0
Gradient (%)
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
16
Algebraic Change in Grade (%)
14
12
10
8 I
0 I I __
I i I I I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
6.3.8. Superelevation, Crossfall & Drainage above the adjacent land, but designers should ensure that
the path shoulders are matched to the path surface level
Paths for cycling should be constructed so that water does and graded with a suitable crossfall (preferably flatter than
not pond on the surface and debris does not wash onto the 1 vert. in 8 horiz.).
path during heavy rain. To achieve this the path should
have adequate crossfall and catch drains to collect water. Paths for cycling should be constructed so that they are not
In flat terrain it may be adequate to simply elevate the path subject to flooding due to a 2 year average recurrence
76 BICYCLES
interval flow in drains. Where significant lengths of path In so far as the needs of cyclists are concerned, curves
are constructed to a lesser standard, signs should be erect- should have positive superelevation in accordance with
ed warning of any risk (e.g. as shown in Figure 7-9). Table 6-2 so that they can be comfortably negotiated.
Where paths have to pass under structures and head room On straight sections crowning of the pavement is prefer-
is limited necessitating the level of the path being below able as it results in less accumulation of debris. On sealed
the flood level, it may be possible to construct a flood wall surfaces a crossfall of 2% - 4% should be adequate to
between the path and the river to hold back water during effectively dispose of surface water whereas unsealed sur-
minor flood events. In extreme conditions the water over- faces may require 5% to prevent puddles of water from
tops the wall and flows along the path. developing. Catch drains will often be required on the
inside of curves as will pipes to carry water under the path.
Superelevation On large radius curves (100 metres, say) an adverse super-
elevation of 2% may be provided to avoid the need for the
2 3 1 4 1 5 6 catch drain and pipes. However, this should only be done
where the catchment area above the path is relatively small
Minimum Radius (metres) and has a surface stable enough that debris is unlikely to
wash over the path. Figure 6-8 shows typical cross sec-
10 9 9 9 9
tions of paths for cycling.
24 23 22 21 21
Where paths are for shared use, the needs of other path
users should be considered. AS 1428 specifies that path
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
47 45 43 42 41
crossfalls should in general not exceed 1%, and that steep-
86 82 1 79 76 73 er crossfalls up to 2.5% may be acceptable in some
instances. For further details on pedestrian facilities and
Source: Californian Dept. of Transportation (1995)
requirements AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians, should
Table 6-2: Superelevation at Curves be consulted. With reference to Table 6-2 there is limited
,5m
I I I
Non-erodioq surface
D. Path an a curve
78
BICYCLES
Grade separated
A ss points to or controlled
path Parking for cars crossings of
major roads and
some collector
P4 roads
Pleasant scen
PATHS
Regular maintenance
and auditing of the path
Destinations-shelter, water, toilets, barbecue,
playground, bicycle parking, kiosk, shops
79
80 BICYCLES
owners of private property abutting the reservation, follows the longitudinal profile of the kerb and is
who may be concerned that provision of a path will therefore generally cheaper to construct because of
adversely affect privacy or the security of their reduced earthworks;
property; and
may be preferred by abutting land owners in terms of
the possible advantages that can be derived from inci-
privacy and nature strip disruption;
dental lighting from fixed sources or motor vehicles.
may result in the effective path width being reduced by
6.5.2. Factors Influencing Roadside Alignment kerb returns (however the use of AS 1428 style side
ramps would be some assistance - see sect. 6.7.3.3) at
Where a path is located in a road reserve and abutting driveways or the path profile being adversely affected
development results in driveways at frequent intervals, a at the cross over;
choice may exist between locating the path adjacent to the
property boundary, locating it adjacent to the kerb or if wide, may be viewed as detracting from the appear-
locating it at an intermediate point, say 1.5 metres behind ance of the streetscape and may imply a higher speed
the kerb. However, in many cases the nature strip will be environment;
too narrow to allow a choice in location of a path.
is less pleasant for cyclists because of traffic noise,
The overriding consideration in determining the location of fumes and speed, and perhaps the splashing of water
a path should be the safety of the path users. For this reason from gutters; and
it is recommended that the path be located to adequately
achieve both clearance from road traffic and clearance may be relatively unaffected by the presence of fences
from the property line to achieve adequate sight distance varying in height and type, or having sharp or exposed
for vehicles and pedestrians leaving driveways and gate- edges or protrusions.
ways. Figure 6-13 provides guidance on desirable clear-
ances for paths located within the road reserves of typical A path located near the property boundary:
urban arterial roads. Wider clearances or physical barriers
provides a more pleasant cycling environment and is
(including landscaping) may be appropriate where:
perceived to be safer for inexperienced or young
the kerbside lane is heavily trafficked; cyclists;
high road speed limits exist (e.g. 80 km/h and above); may limit visibility of path users to drivers reversing
or out of driveways;
child or inexperienced cyclists regularly use the path. does not necessarily follow the kerb profile and may
result in steeper gradients for cyclists or be more costly
It will often be necessary for a path alignment to shift to construct;
between the road reserve boundary and the kerb in order
to retain vegetation, avoid obstacles, utilise bridges or con- may be viewed as having a lower negative visual
nect to pedestrian crossings of the road. Figure 6-14 illus- impact on the street than a kerbside path;
PATHS 81
may be unacceptable to abutting land owners; Similarly, it may also be acceptable to locate a path for
cycling in an outer separator of a major road, which may
is more efficient for the mail service, if the nature strip be the most appropriate option depending on site condi-
is very wide; and tions and traffic conditions.
Paths for cycling are not usually located in central medians. The flow chart only considers the primary factors needed
This is generally undesirable because motorists do not expect to determine the type of treatment required. As for the
cyclists at median openings and therefore cyclists may be put associated guide charts for the choice of cycling facilities,
at risk, and also because a cyclist having an origin and a des- in this document (refer Figure 2-4 and Figure 4-1), there
tination on the same side of the road is encouraged to cross are other issues, constraints and practices that will have a
the carriageway twice to access the path. However, it may be bearing on the decision making process.
acceptable to locate a path in a median where:
Notes (Figure 6-15):
the median is wide and the outer verges narrow; 1. The level of demand can be assessed generally on the
basis of the peak periods of a typical day as follows:
the spacing of intersections is large;
Low demand: Infrequent use of path (say less than
the speed environment of the road is low; 10 users per hour);
motor vehicles are required to give way or stop for path High demand: Regular use in both directions of
users; and/or travel (say more than 50 users per hour).
safe crossings of the carriageways and intersections 2. These path volumes are suggested in order to limit the
can be made (e.g. traffic volumes low to moderate, incidence of conflict between users, and are significant-
major intersections controlled by traffic signals). ly lower than the capacity of the principal path types.
82 BICYCLES
Obstacle or
Path poor verge conditions
Property Boundary
Road Kerb
Road
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
ACCEPTABLE
Good alignment with adequate clearances to kerb and Mperty boundary.
Figure 6-14: Integrating a Shared Path with Existing Tree Planting and Obstacles
or;
Shared use paths are the most common type of facility due
to the cost to construct separated path facilities, the limi-
tations of space and because of their versatility in provid-
ing a facility for cyclists and all the other possible users
listed in Section 6.1. Figure 6-16: Shared Use Path (WA)
demand exists for both a pedestrian path and a bicycle Path Width (m)
path but where the intensity of use is not expected to Local Access Commuter
be sufficiently great to provide separate facilities; Path path
an existing low use footpath can be modified to pro- T sirable 2.5 3.0 3.5
J
vide for cyclists by satisfying legal requirements and
Acceptable 2.0-2.5
as necessary upgrading the surface, width and kerb Range
2,0 - 3. 3.0-4.0
ramps; and/or
Table 6-3: Shared- Use Path Dimensions
there is an existing road nearby which is available for
faster cyclists to use, to limit the extent of user conflict
The various path operational scenarios are shown in
on the shared path.
Figure 6-19. These form the basis of the widths provided
Shared use paths that utilise existing footpaths may be sat- in Table 6-3, and were developed with consideration of the
isfactory where they provide: principles outlined in Section 6.3.4.
A convenient and safe option for inexperienced With reference to Section 6.3.3, depending on the `tidal'
cyclists and young cyclists. Because footpaths usually nature of cyclist and pedestrian flows, the dimensions may
have driveway crossings or side streets intersecting at be suitable for a path capacity up to 300 cyclists and
frequent intervals they are only suitable for low pedestrians per hour, based on two principal lanes of path
cycling speeds (less than 15 km/h); or traffic.
A safer option for cyclists at squeeze points such as Designers should review the likely operational character-
istics of paths in accordance with Section 6.3.4 during the
narrow, heavily trafficked sections of road, bridges,
design process, to determine the appropriate path width.
underpasses or railway level crossings. In such cases it
is important that the connections between the footpath With reference to Figure 6-19:
and the road be properly designed so that cyclists can
leave and enter the general traffic stream safely and major recreational paths should be 4.0 metes wide to
conveniently. This can be achieved utilising kerb permit the cyclist groups/couples to pass pedestrian
ramps or driveway crossings that have a smooth invert couples or other cyclist groups, or to permit cyclists
or by constructing ramps similar to those shown in travelling in opposite directions to pass pedestrians
Figure 4-23 or Figure 4-24. with convenience and safety;
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
84
I
1-
ago*
BICYCLES
O)ow*dts}
Figure 6-17: Shared Use Path - Layout
shared use paths often experience a mix of simultane- Separated paths should not be provided in busy shopping
ous commuting and recreational use and in these cir- centres where large numbers of pedestrians are expected
cumstances should have a minimum width of 3.5 to cross the path in conflict with cyclists.
metres;
In most instances a separated path is preferred where a Figure 6-20: Separated Two-Way Path (Kangaroo Point, Qld)
combination of user volumes, clearances and other factors
indicate that the path should be constructed with a width
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
A separated path (see Figure 6-20) is a path on which [Doinble j 2.5 2.0 4.5
cyclists and pedestrians are required to use separate desig- Acceptable 2.0-3.0 ..._1,5+ 3.5+
nated areas of the path. These designated areas are created Range _.._......__
PATHS
Description and Purpose Careful design, prominent pavement markings and sign-
ing, and in particular the use of distinctive pavement sur-
Where a wide nature strip exists and bicycle lanes along faces are important in the case of directional footpath
the road carriageway are not possible, consideration can treatments, as for other separated path facilities.
be given to the construction of separated one-way paths
(see Figure 6-23). Separated one-way paths should be constructed in accor-
dance with the details shown in Table 6-5 and the associ-
These paths enable bicycles to travel on the side of the ated facility layout shown in Figure 6-24. Other than in a
road, in the verge area, in one direction with bicycle move- one-way street, the treatment is used for the same of direc-
ment in the opposite direction provided on the other side tion of cyclists' travel as the adjacent traffic lane.
of the road.
Pavement symbols and arrows should be provided for both
The treatment can be advantageous when:
the pedestrian and cycle path sections.
used contiguously with other traditional bicycle lane Designers should confirm the suitability of the treatment
treatments located on roads, in order to maintain con- with respect to local regulations.
tinuous access for cyclists past squeeze points;
safety problem exists for cyclists in the road carriage- Footpath* Total
way; or 1.5 3.8
high proportion of child cyclists exist. Acceptable
1.2+ I 2.4+
Range
The treatment is most appropriate where:
*refer AUSTROADS Part 13
there is a limited number of driveway crossings
Table 6-5: Separated One-Way Path Dimensions
(preferably less than one per 100m);
adequate sight lines exist, to significant road and The operation of a separated one-way path is shown in
pedestrian path access points; and Figure 6-25. This forms the basis of the widths provided in
Table 6-5, and was developed with consideration of the
suitable separation/barrier exists between the path and
the road carriageway.
principles outlined in Section 6.3.4.
I Y1 Y,
ADD= at )r4dm
In contrast to separated two-way paths, a barrier separat- With reference to Austroads Part 13, 1.2 metres is a
ing the bicycle and pedestrian path sections (see Figure common minimum width for footpaths. In the event that a
6-22) is not usually required for separated one-way paths. barrier is used to separate the bicycle and pedestrian path
However, it should be used in situations such as where sections, then a wider footpath section may be required to
path conditions are congested or where unsafe conditions allow passing manoeuvres on that section of the path,
exist due to the path users. amongst other reasons (e.g. pedestrian volumes).
90 BICYCLES
:::::I1
A 2-run Cat ng and Local Ace
I
I
I LOm , y r 9.0111
B 1Om commuting
6.6.3. Exclusive Bicycle Paths there is a significant cycling demand and very few
pedestrians desire to use the path or a separate footpath
Description and Purpose is provided;
An exclusive bicycle path (see Figure 6-26) is a path set there is very limited motor vehicle access across the
aside for exclusive use by cyclists. For this facility to be path;
established, legally appropriate signing is required (sect.
9.2.2). it is possible to achieve an alignment that generally
allows cyclists uninterrupted and safe travel at a rela-
An exclusive bicycle path permits fast bicycle travel and is tively high constant speed (say 30 km/h); and
the most desirable of the off-carriageway alternatives, par-
ticularly for commuter routes although it will also serve there is significant cycling demand and the path width
many local destinations along the way. The ultimate facil- is too narrow for shared use.
ity will have full grade separation at road intersections and
a path lighting system to improve safety for users,
amongst other features.
Routes are ideally developed along suburban railway and
freeway reserves. These corridors can link separate areas
that have a high population density or provide links to
regional centres and other areas with high employment
densities. Such links will allow commuter bicycle use to
develop to its full potential.
Importantly, they may also provide for shorter trips to des-
tinations such as schools along the way, and enhance
access to rail stations and bus interchanges for those wish-
ing to combine cycling and public transport for longer
journeys.
V (op
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
:J/) :
:
fP U
T ' l 6mumstanta of
I I
I E t
t t t
6 2.5m i and Local Acc
Ft" r I
20 km/h I I I
I I
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
s
1
C 3.0m Cwntnuting i
t
Frequent & c urtent I I
I t
in both directions
I t t
3O km/h+
6.7. Intersections of Paths with Roads. Sharp downgrades to road junctions should be avoided
where possible. Where the path alignment is straight on
Off-road paths must be readily accessible in order to be the approach to a road (e.g. Figure 6-36) then the path
well utilised by the community. Access should always be should be as flat as possible, the longitudinal down gradi-
provided where paths cross local streets and arterial ent being no greater than 3 per cent. Where the approach
roads. Accessibility should be improved further by con- speed to the intersection is controlled (e.g. Figure 6-29) a
nections to quiet local roads or culs-de-sac. Connections steeper downgrade may be used in difficult situations.
to local roads may be similar to the treatments used for Under these conditions it is suggested that the desirable
local street closures discussed in Section 4.7(d) and illus- maximum grade is 5 per cent.
trated in Figure 4-37. Where a path is located on one side
of a road, kerb ramps should be provided opposite every Paths for cycling should be aligned to intersect roads at
side street to enable local users access. They should approximately 90 degrees. Where sight distance is restrict-
preferably provide an attractive setting that enhances the ed curves should be used on the approach to slow cyclists
streetscape. All connections and crossings should be to a safe approach speed (refer Figure 6-29). Such an
designed and constructed so as to encourage safe and cor- alignment may not suit some cyclists and landscaping may
rect use by cyclists. be necessary to prevent cyclists from taking short cuts.
Intersections of paths with roads should meet the criteria There are a number of types of path/road intersections that
set out below. are applicable depending on circumstances.
Sight distance to the intersection must be adequate on all 6.7.2.1. Crossings of Low Volume Streets
approaches so that both cyclist and motorist can easily
identify the treatment and the priority that applies. In gen- The occurrence of low volume local streets frequently
eral, given that intersection controls generally do not intersecting with significant paths can result in a poor level
favour cyclists under traffic regulations, road carriageway of service for cyclists, or a inferior riding experience for
traffic must currently be given priority at these locations. recreational cyclists.
PATHS 93
/
/
H
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
C
I
/
/
80m
ti
1
x t Y i
Minimum 1 10m 3m
Desirable 20m 10m
Local authorities invest considerable resources into Local The preferred treatment is a path crossing that is raised
Area Traffic Management schemes. Therefore an opportu- with appropriate give way sign controls erected to regulate
nity exists to improve the continuity of paths for cyclists road traffic. An example is shown Figure 6-30.
whilst simultaneously providing a `device' to control There are known legislative constraints to the use of the
speeds in local streets. treatment under several jurisdictions and therefore some
94 BICYCLES
the priority that would be assigned to the road is con- Where an off-road path crosses a busy local street or an
sistent with that elsewhere along the road, in the vicin- arterial road away from an intersection it may be neces-
ity of the crossing; sary to provide facilities to aid the cyclists in making a
safe crossing. These facilities may be in the form of con-
the proportion of commercial traffic is low; trolled crossings or physical refuges.
to
(a) Controlled Crossings allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross the road in two
stages;
Paths for cycling can be coordinated with signalised or
unsignalised pedestrian crossings and school crossings. provide physical protection for cyclists and pedestri-
Cyclists are usually required by law to dismount at formal ans;
pedestrian crossings including school crossings. Where a
bicycle route crosses a road at a signalised crossing care increase motorists' awareness of the crossing; and
should be taken to ensure that activation buttons are locat- can be installed at relatively low cost.
ed to avoid the need for cyclists to cross in front of oncom-
ing path users and within easy reach for a mounted cyclist. Note, the example in Figure 6-33 has a `perpendicular'
Induction loops can also be installed to facilitate detection. crossing refuge for cyclists travelling in one direction, and
a `parallel' crossing refuge for cyclists travelling in the
`Bicycle' symbols for traffic lights are included in other direction. This is to facilitate access around an large
Australian Standard 1742.2 and should be provided where island to the left of the photo.
the crossing serves both pedestrians and cyclists provided
State traffic regulations permit this treatment. A green Refuges are appropriate where;
bicycle signal allows cyclists to ride across the crossing.
Where pedestrian and cyclist demand are both heavy there motor traffic volumes and speeds make it difficult for
is a tendency for pedestrians to move to the front and cyclists and pedestrians to cross two way motor traffic
block the progress of cyclists using the crossing. In such flow;
cases consideration should be given to segregating cyclists the combined pedestrian and cyclist demand justifies
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
These traffic islands, examples of which are shown in In order to accommodate a bicycle which is typically 1.75
Figure 6-33 and Figure 6-34, may be beneficial because metres long, it is desirable that a refuge be at least 2.0
they: metres wide. However, 1.8 metres may suffice in tight sit-
uations. Where there are concentrated cyclist demands at
certain periods of the day (e.g. secondary schools) a
greater width and length may be required to provide addi-
tional storage.
Figure 6-32: Bicycle Signals Figure 6-33: Refuge (Black Forest, SA)
96 BICYCLES
y
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
It
1.$-Mm *We. 2.K' t}y3-4.Om
lk-1.5m ' I .Qm
Z*51
6.7.2.4. Other - Paths Adjacent To Roads by cyclists. The preferred arrangement for an intersection
of a shared footway with a side road is shown in Figure
Paths which run parallel to busy roads often have to cross 6-35. Ramps for the cyclists should have the features
side roads which may be minor or important traffic routes. shown in Figure 6-44.
At signalised intersections it is appropriate to have the
cyclists cross with the pedestrian phase. It is important to
locate the crossing so that sufficient sight distance exists to
6.7.3. Ancillary Treatments & Features
allow the driver of a left turning vehicle to see a cyclist 6.7.3.1. Path Terminal Devices
waiting to cross.
(a) General
It is generally appropriate for cyclists to cross close to the
intersection, particularly if there are high boundary fences, Path terminal devices are generally erected to restrict drivers
other restrictions to sight lines or queues of vehicles pre- of cars from illegally gaining access to reserves and also on
sent. Where sight lines are not restricted, the crossing may the premise that they aid the safety of cyclists by restricting
be located further from the intersection where the side cyclists' speeds on the path approaches to roads. However,
road may be narrower. However, the deviation required there is some evidence these devices are a hazard to cyclists
should not be excessive as this will discourage proper use and as such they generally should not be installed unless:
PATHS 97
Holding Rail
S ed Path
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
there is clear evidence of unauthorised and undesirable the approach alignment of path, and in particular the
motor vehicle access; and anticipated categories of cyclists;
the device is effective at excluding such vehicles and be accessible to a range of path users including pedes-
not readily circumvented trians and physically disabled people. In relation to
bicycles, they should accommodate the common bicy-
Cyclists must be able to negotiate path entrances with cle types as well as tandem bicycles, bicycles with
ease. They need to be able to concentrate on other traffic, trailers, and other human powered vehicles;
pedestrians, pavements and ramps and not be distracted by
overly restrictive barriers. if consisting of a `frame' be:
It is also well known that cyclists do not like to dismount - at least 1.0 metre high above the riding surface;
and walk. Once on the bicycle they prefer to keep moving,
- shaped so that on the approach side of the frame,
even slowly, and hence maintain some momentum rather
the minimum radius of the frame is 250 mm; and
than having to stop completely.
- constructed of individual frame elements that are
For these reasons overly restrictive path terminal devices
rounded, without sharp edges, and having a mini-
are usually ineffective because cyclists may travel around
mum diameter of 100 mm
them, sometimes performing dangerous manoeuvres.
Complicated chicanes should therefore not be provided. In if consisting of isolated vertical poles (e.g. bollards):
general crossings should allow cyclists to move straight
across the intersecting roadway, any slowing of cyclists - be at least 1.0 metre high above the riding surface;
preferably being achieved by relatively sharp curves on and
the path in advance of the intersection. - have a minimum diameter of 300 mm*
(b) Terminal Design be painted in a contrasting colour (white or yellow)
If local authorities choose to use or develop terminal and be fitted with quality reflective tape (see Figure
devices that are not documented in this guide, or otherwise 6-42) on horizontal and vertical elements to ensure it is
to implement devices discussed elsewhere in this guide, visible from all directions. Barriers etc. on both sides
the designs should: of paths should be painted and delineated in this
manner. Similarly, reflective tape should be fully
seek to enhance the safety of cyclists accounting for wrapped around the elements to which it is attached to
factors such as gradients, the proximity of roads and ensure that it is clearly visible from all directions;
98 BICYCLES
be illuminated in accordance with the AS 1158 Public - that may present additional risk (e.g. single lane
Lighting Code, or with the lighting requirements of devices or those with narrow central bollards); or
this document, as appropriate;
due to conditions associated with increased risk
be located with at least 1.4 metres clearance to adjacent (e.g. where gradients are significant, stopping sight
fixtures and so that cyclists can pass conveniently; distance to the device is limited, where group rides
occur regularly or where paths are heavily traf-
not present a hazardous feature for any pedestrian ficked); and
group (e.g. visually disabled pedestrians - also see
sect. 6.2); be preceded by tactile linemarking, or tactile path sur-
face and a painted unbroken line, where cyclists need
not be easily circumvented by unauthorised vehicles,
to deviate from their line of approach. Similarly as a
such that either the device is rendered ineffective, or
further means of warning to approaching cyclists, it is
that alternative paths of access are created in adjacent
desirable for the device to be visible to one cyclist
reserve areas resulting in higher maintenance
whilst following immediately behind another cyclist.
demands;
*There are numerous reports of collisions of cyclists on
have clearances at the terminal device and parallel
group rides with isolated vertical poles (e.g. bollards)
roads that are sufficient in the event of cyclists failing
located within paths. Therefore it may be appropriate to
to properly negotiate the device;
consider the use of poles that are not less than 1.8 metres
be located 5 - 10 metres in advance of the intersection high where narrow poles (minimum 100 mm diameter) are
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
to enable `storage' and deceleration, whilst waiting for used, to increase the likelihood of observation of poles
other path users to pass through the terminal device; above the form of a leading cyclist.
have regard for the general location of the device in the (c) Terminal Device Opening Width
immediate path length. In general it would be inap-
In most instances a minimum opening width of 1.4 metres
propriate to locate terminals at or near curves, within a
is appropriate to encourage slower speeds by cyclists or
distance of less than 5 metres of kerb ramps or within
where restriction to motor-vehicle access is warranted.
a manoeuvring zone of cyclists;
Terminal devices should have sufficient capacity to
accommodate emergency or maintenance vehicle accommodate the anticipated path traffic (sect. 6.3.3).
access where this is not available elsewhere in the
Due to concerns regarding injuries to cyclists resulting
vicinity of the terminal (in the event that the path will
from the use of overly restrictive terminal devices, there is
be relied upon by such vehicles). Note, wherever ter-
some support for wider openings (up to 1.6 metres), on the
minal device elements are removable the connections
basis that the terminals devices will still discourage the
(or sockets) should be flush at the connecting surface
majority of drivers of cars illegally attempting to gain
and not present a hazard to path users;
access to reserves and the like.
include adequate protection where the sides grade
(d) Terminal Treatments Examples
away from the path at a steep angle or where obstruc-
tions exist; Because the cognitive skills of primary school children are
not fully developed, facilities provided specifically for this
be constructed so that small passenger cars cannot pass
easily through or under horizontal rail sections where
group or used frequently by this group may require more
a primary objective of the terminal is to restrict access
restrictive controls. The devices used should be kept as
for motor-vehicles. Note, it is generally impractical to
simple as possible and as well as slowing the cyclist to
restrict motorcycles and to do so may result in hazard
walking pace, should direct the cyclist so that the nearest
conflicting traffic stream is more easily seen.
for cyclists;
>-
asrn
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
4-
*Length of fence - 5W
W footway width
0 Minimum
Desirable
L?
lOm 1 3m
20m t Orn
I `I
Figure 6-36: Alternative Terminal Controls at RoadlPath Intersection for School Children
A deflection rail terminal may be used to achieve the exceeded, it could be duplicated so that two single lane
objective of a path narrowing. As a single lane terminal it openings are provided.
is appropriate for use where low bicycle volumes exist.
Whilst an alternative device may be preferred, in the event In addition to the required design features listed in Section
that the capacity of the single lane access is likely to be (b) above, a deflection rail should have the following char
acteristics:
gt
[V
I
!
-
I
/i
II
lit
a
I
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
1.Om
10
I-Io I
6-44). Where appropriate, holding rails should conform to 6.7.3.3. Kerb Ramps
the requirements listed in Section 6.7.3.1(b).
The design of all kerb ramps should be in accordance with
A sign extension (refer Figure 6-42) should not be used in AS 1428 and otherwise with the details shown in Figure
close proximity to road carriageways or where cyclists 6-44. The provisions of a gently graded and smooth invert
would turn in close proximity to the sign extension. at the gutter ramp are vital design features for the safety
and comfort of all path users, including cyclists.
To avoid the unnecessary proliferation of holding rails,
they should not be installed at the traffic islands or Flatter kerb ramps of 1 (vert.) in 15 (horiz.) should be used
approaches to signalised intersections unless specifically for transition between on-road facilities and paths to cater
sought by users. for the higher travel speeds (also see sect. 4.5.3).
T
4 251)rm Ra"
tom Re leck"we tope, see detail
diorter l
'1
0.6m (.)
*Tope to be t s ify otherwise
Figure 6-43: Smooth Kerb Ramp (Adelaide, SA) pavement markings including centre lines and Give
Way holding lines;
A combination of the two ramp styles should be consid-
ered, e.g. a flared entry ramp with side ramps not exceed- pavement splays in the corners (minimum radius of
ing the maximum ramp gradient. 2.5m); and
For further details on pedestrian facilities and require- Cross intersections which allow high speed conflicts
ments AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians, should be con- should not be provided.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
sulted.
To ensure right of way requirements are emphasised by
Where there are short (less than 5m wide) sections of path site conditions, consideration should be given to the con-
across traffic islands it may be preferable to provide a struction and additional controls (see Figure 6-46 and
channel at road level rather than back-to-back kerb ramps Figure 6-47) at the intersections of exclusive paths or seg-
with only a few metres of raised path in between. regated paths with footpaths, where:
12M (mi 1 In to be de t
with Au*oods
o cool 1428
f1 Path (rocs.} --
r1
h
Control to
NOW footpath
Footpath
Edge of gutter
paths are well used; cant capital and operating costs its provision needs to be
carefully considered. Whilst many bicycles may be
the footpath is used regularly by visually impaired equipped with modern lighting equipment this equipment is
people; or generally inadequate to illuminate the pavement so that
sight distance constraints exist. cyclists, travelling at a `reasonable' speed, are able to avoid
potholes and other hazards. The provision of lighting does
In general the intersections of paths should be constructed not remove the need for providing a separation (centre) line.
and controlled in accordance with the established princi-
ples of codes of practice for roads. For, instance, at path The provision of public lighting on paths for cycling
junctions, the controls and layout should favour the pre- depends on the nature of the facility and its expected use
dominant flow on the straight through route. Also, design- at night. In general lighting of bicycle facilities may be
ers must ensure the construction and controls are consis- categorised as follows:
tent with local regulations.
paths for cycling associated with promenades or some
The area around path intersections should be kept clear of other centre of night-time activity. These are typically
hazardous obstacles, such as log barriers, to provide by the seaside, a river bank or in a city centre where a
cyclists with a recovery zone. Any landscaping or planting high standard of public lighting is desirable to create
should be low and `soft'. However, landscaping is useful an attractive environment;
where cyclists may attempt to travel the shortest path
paths for cycling used predominantly for commuting
between path junctions or at sharp curves, which
by workers or students. Because it becomes dark rela-
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
NOTE:
1. Cross rttersections of
s Id not be pro XCOM of
2.5m potential for high s clans
2. seder pr ' ion of
at side of paths where main
volumes high
Minimum
sW"er torn
2.5m Radius
r*0 Al
MMMWMM
XIN4
Kerb Rmv J
09
/7 .//.
Australian road authorities have very little collective expe- Australian Standard AS 1158.0-1997, provides standards
rience with public lighting of off-road paths. American for the lighting of urban roads and other public thorough-
and Canadian references (Illuminating Engineering fares. The standard specifies lighting category `B2' for
Society of North America, 1983: Velo Quebec, 1992) pro- bicycle paths. In view of the above mentioned overseas
vide information on practices in North America. Practices practice and public lighting experience this level may be
in the United Kingdom and Europe, where bicycle usage inappropriately low in most situations.
may be higher than in Australia or North America, tend to
provide higher levels of lighting as indicated in British Roads which have roadway lighting to the AS 1158 stan-
Standard BS 5489 (1989). dard will provide sufficiently for on-road bicycle facilities
and will have enough surround illuminance to provide
adequate lighting of shared footpaths or bicycle paths
located within 3 metres to 5 metres of the kerb.
106 BICYCLES
6.9.2. Objectives of Lighting on Paths For Where continuous lighting along a path is difficult to jus-
Cycling tify, it may be appropriate to light only the locations of
increased hazard such as;
The level of horizontal illumination needs to be sufficient
for cyclists to easily follow the path, avoid potholes and intersections with other paths or roads;
obstacles, and to read surface markings. An adequate level
of vertical illumination should also make vertical surfaces sharp horizontal and vertical curves, and steep grades;
such as fences, walls, kerbs, trees and shrubs visible. The ramps to structures and at the portals of tunnels and
overall level of lighting should enable cyclists to see other subways;
cyclists, read signs and also enable motorists to see cyclists
where the path intersects a road or runs close to a road. where clearance to obstructions is minimal;
In the absence of significant experience in Australia on where pedestrian numbers are high;
lighting levels for paths for cycling, the following Table
6-7 provides suggested lighting levels which should locations which have special security problems;
achieve the above object. The lighting levels given accord special facilities such as stairs, bicycle parking etc..
with the American and Canadian guides. The levels sug-
gested in the North American guides for tunnels, however, Where it is proposed to continuously light a highly utilised
are considered to be excessive and the lighting levels path to the levels given in Table 6-7, special attention
shown in Table 6-7 are therefore based on experience with should be given to the above listed locations of increased
pedestrian underpasses in the State of Victoria. hazard to ensure that they are lit to above the average
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
7 Provision at Structures
7.1. General
The design of structures is very important to cyclists.
Existing road bridges are often narrower than the road on
the approaches thus creating a squeeze point for cyclists.
Because of the high relative cost of new bridges there is an
understandable tendency for designers to be as economi-
cal as possible in the widths provided for the various users.
It is important, however, that road managers look for ways
to better cater for cyclists at all existing structures and that
designers and planners ensure that cyclists are adequately
provided for in the design of all new structures.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
2.4m ruin
fi__
Cross Section Under Bridge
In some States, it is required that overpasses are encaged to If an underpass is used the alignment of the path on the
discourage objects being dropped onto underpassing traffic. approach should be designed such that users can see
through the culvert. Underpasses of roads should be con-
7.4.3. Underpasses structed with minimal cover between the top of the under-
pass and the road. Whilst this may necessitate the reloca-
An advantage to cyclists of using an underpass is that the tion of services it has the advantage that shorter approach
gradients will often be more favourable, either being rela- ramps can be used requiring less overall space. Also better
tively flat or having a down grade followed by an up grade opportunities for the provision of adequate sight lines may
which assists the cyclist. The topography at some loca- be possible in order to enhance personal security.
PROVISION AT STRUCTURES 111
7.4.4. Desirable Widths Existing stairs can often be readily modified to provide for
cyclists by the addition of a ramp formed by concrete infill
On new grade separated crossings, the minimum clear or steel plate. Ramps may be either on the sides or within
width should be determined in accordance with the rec- a median of the stairs.
ommendations in Section 6.6 allowing for the nature of
use, the type of path and for clearances. In general such Also:
crossings should not be less than 3.0 metres in width. wheeling ramps should be provided on both sides of
However, a minimum width of 2.0 metres (between stairways where significant bicycle volumes exist;
handrails if appropriate) may be adopted in situations the gradient of ramps should not exceed 25% (CROW,
where an existing structure is being utilised and: 1994);
bicycle traffic demand is low and few pedestrians
would be expected;
narrow channels or channels that are rounded at the 7.6.2. Fences and Batters
base should be used to improve the ease of wheeling
for cyclists. A channel designed to accommodate what The installation of a fence barrier at the side of a path is
is on average the widest bicycle tyre (i.e. that of a desirable where it is located in close proximity to a steep
mountain bike) would be ideal; batter or large fall, or more specifically as recommended
by Figure 7-13. In addition to those referred to in the
the channel should be constructed approximately 0.4 figure, other circumstances exist where it may be desirable
metres from a fence or wall, or so as to avoid the catch- to erect fences even if provision is not required by the
ing of pedals or handle bars; figure. These include intersections of paths or a curving
path alignment, located in the vicinity of batters or a fall.
handrails should be constructed as close as practical to
the fence or wall, when erected adjacent to a wheeling A fence barrier may be appropriate where a path is locat-
ramp; ed adjacent to a watercourse or lake. A full barrier fence
would be appropriate where a vertical fall to water occurs
wheeling ramps should be constructed with a smooth
within 5 metres of a path.
transition onto and off of the ramp;
it may be desirable to construct the ramp with a kerb Figure 7-13 highlights the circumstances in which either a
(see Figure 7-12) to limit the possibility of pedestrians partial barrier fence (refer Figure 7-14), or a full barrier
fence (refer Figure 7-15) or equivalent form of protection,
inadvertently stepping on to the ramp section; and
should be used. These barriers are intended to prevent
it would be prudent to construct the ramp so as to min- access to a slope or to a fall away from a path or other
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
imise the possibility that it may be cycled on. riding surface, where injury might otherwise be expected
in the event of a cyclist riding inadvertently off the line of
a path.
1
75-IODMM kerb
50-1 r
4ftm
Figure 7-12: Bicycle Wheeling Ramp Construction Details
PROVISION AT STRUCTURES 113
iff Fame
t It fndm
r ADi mpow <2 <0"25
Pence r weed! <5 0.25 to 2
INN Barrier Fenr kW <a 1 >2 t
==t====
II
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
metres)] Z I
Where it is proposed to use fences or similar structures in Quebec (1992) indicates cyclists are more likely to be
association with bicycle lane or path facilities, the follow- injured by striking a fence than by riding into a ravine;
ing factors should also be considered:
the width of paths and lanes should account for the
the various fence elements (posts, railings etc.) should presence of fences (see sect. 6.3.5 for further details on
be designed to minimise the possibility of cyclists clearances);
snagging their handlebars or pedals on the barrier;
fence railing likely to have (or develop) burrs, splin-
care needs to be exercised in the choice of fences to ters, sharp or rough edges or surfaces should be avoid-
avoid those that would give rise to spearing injuries if ed. In general steel fences are preferred;
struck (by any vehicle). In particular, the proximity of
fences to roads will have a bearing on this aspect; the following fence types should not be used within I
metre of bicycle routes, and preferably would be locat-
the ends of fences should be at least 1 metre away from ed further away:
the riding surface, but may taper closer to the edge of
the path if necessary (refer Figure 7-18). They should Treated pine log - these are often constructed with
also be appropriately delineated by signs and reflective exposed ends and are invariably too low to be used
tape, and preferably be of a light colour. Note, Velo adjacent to bicycle routes;
114 BICYCLES
Chain mesh - these may catch pedals, have exposed horizontal fence rails can act as a ladder for children.
elements in some instances and have been responsible
for spearing injuries; and Examples of fences that have desirable functional qualities
in so far as cycling is concerned are shown in Figure 7-16
Post and wire - these have exposed elements. and Figure 7-17. Both have provision to avoid the catch-
ing of pedals of cyclists.
the width of gaps in a `full b 'er' fence should be
such that children cannot climb through the fence; and
Path
i mP ICorance
tie 1
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Path
Figure 7-16: Full Barrier Fence Figure 7-17: Inclined Full Barrier Fence
(Toowong Bikeway, Taringa, Qld) (Jack Pesch Bridge, Indooroopilly, Qld)
with asphalt;
8.5. Surfaces for Cycling All paths should therefore be designed to withstand at
least a fully laden small truck.
8.5.1. Tolerances Most paths should have a hard weatherproof surface.
The new pavement surface of a bicycle lane or path for Primarily they can be constructed as a flexible pavement
of crushed rock surfaced with asphalt or a bituminous seal,
cyclists should be shaped to match existing features such
or as a rigid concrete pavement.
as pit covers, edgings or driveways, to within 5 millime-
tres. It is desirable that the finished surface of a new bicy- It is vital that the sub-grade of both flexible and rigid pave-
cle lane or path does not: ments are compacted to a satisfactory standard and soft areas
are treated. It may be necessary in some cases to assess sub-
deviate from a 3 metre straight edge by more than 5
grade conditions along the line of the proposed path.
millimetres at any point; and
Typical cross-sections of flexible and rigid pavements are
have a rate of change in deviation in excess of 1 mm in
shown in Figure 8-8. Individual State and local govern-
240 mm.
ment authorities will have a preference for particular types
The surface of an existing bicycle lane or a path for of pavement based on experience using local materials
cyclists should not exceed the tolerances nominated in that should result in economical pavements. Appropriate
Table 8-1. The figures in the table are applicable to dis- pavement design advice should be sought in every
continuities in the surface of concrete and other sealed instance.
pavements, at the pavement/gutter interface, at interfaces Where paths are located on river banks and likely to
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
between the pavement surface and service covers, at fail- become inundated they should be constructed of concrete
ures and at subsidences and the like. to provide greater resistance to scour by flood water.
The table requirements may be difficult to achieve where Coloured pavement surfaces are used in some instances.
a pavement abuts an unsealed surface. However authori- For further discussion see Section 9.7.
ties should make every effort to limit the height of steps in
these locations as the affect of cyclists travelling along or 8.5.2.1. Bituminous Surface Pavements
across a step can be severe.
Flexible pavements have in the past been favoured in some
Whilst, no dimension is provided in relation to a groove jurisdictions because they are usually cheaper to construct
perpendicular to the direction of travel, this circumstance than concrete and have in general provided superior riding
should be treated as two steps if greater than 100 mm wide. qualities.
Grooves or steps with dimensions in excess of the figures A recent innovation has been the use of geofabric rein-
listed in Table 8-1 are potentially hazardous to cyclists. forced bituminous concrete and double spray seal pave-
ments. In additional to a typical flexible pavement design,
Not to Exceed (mm): examples of geofabric reinforced pavements are shown in
Figure 8-8. The spray seal version has been used as an
Width of Height of economical solution where significant sub-grade move-
Groove Step ment was expected.
0
-Flow C"JOW
bl_
teg
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
-+++YWtiwww. .w i-
1d)L
occasional heavy traffic (in the case of reinforced narrower and fewer joints.
paths).
It is sometimes perceived that the contrast between the
Concrete paths should be of sufficient strength to resist colour of lines and concrete surfaces is insufficient.
cracking and differential vertical movement. A skid resis- Conversely, concrete paths are thought to offer a high stan-
tant surface finish should be provided by transverse dard of delineation for cycling in dark conditions. As for
brooming of the wet concrete. Similar attention should be other path surface types, it is important that pavement
given to the smoothness of path sections both at joints and markings are maintained on concrete paths to a high stan-
in between. dard, as illustrated by Figure 8-10.
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE 121
to reduce costs; or
The second stage would be the provision of an asphalt, or Figure 8-11: Bridge with Timber Deck
bituminous surface, or possibly of a concrete surface.
8.6. Quality Systems
Care should be taken in the selection of the (unsealed) sur-
face material to ensure that the riding surface is smooth 8.6.1. General
and well bound, as cyclists will not be attracted to a path Quality systems should ensure that when a road or path
which has a poor surface. Well graded river gravels are has to be `opened' or repaired, it is restored to the correct
most suitable. Materials that result in loose surfacing standards of compaction and surface quality so that the
should not be used under any circumstances. Good patch does not subside with the passing of time, and the
drainage is also an important factor in the success of surfacing of the patch does not have an abrupt edge.
gravel paths. Subsidence of backfill and pavement at trenches across
roads and paths is particularly concerning because cyclists
8.5.3. Timber Surfaces are unable to avoid a trench as they might avoid an isolat-
ed pothole.
Timber is a common surface material in the case of
bridges. Whilst it can present a satisfactory riding surface,
the use of an appropriate form of construction is important 8.6.2. Bicycle Safety Audits
to avoid any hazard for cyclists. It is important to focus on the needs of cyclists, as for
Gaps between longitudinal planks in timber bridge decks other road users in relation to the planning, design, main-
(see Figure 8-11) can trap bicycle wheels and cause seri- tenance and construction of road and path infrastructure.
ous injuries to cyclists. The implementation of a system of auditing in relation to
cycling facilities, either integrated with a similar process
On new timber bridges the planks should be placed per- for roads, or otherwise, is recognised as the most appro-
pendicular to the direction of travel of cyclists. In con- priate means of assessment for roads and paths.
structing and maintaining bridges it is important to ensure
that the deck joints at abutments and piers provide a Detailed guidance on auditing processes is provided by
smooth and hence safe passage for cyclists. AUSTROADS (1994). A broad listing of various issues of
concern in relation to cycling facilities is contained in
Consideration should therefore be given to remedial treat- Appendix A to assist the preparation of structured bicycle
ment of existing timber bridges with longitudinal planks. safety audit checklists.
122 BICYCLES
Those charged with the responsibility of developing signs 9.2.1. Bicycle Lane Designation
and line marking schemes for bicycle routes or paths The sign in Figure 9-1(a) is used to legally establish an
should check that proposed signs are enforceable under exclusive bicycle or a bicycle/car parking lane on the road
the relevant traffic regulations. carriageway so that motorists are advised of the legal
status of the lane and traffic regulations can be enforced.
Signs are costly and where used on remote sections of
Supplementary plates such as that shown in Figure 9-1(b)
paths for cycling are often subject to vandalism. An exces-
may also be used to specify times of operation. Where
sive number of signs can diminish the amenity of a facili-
necessary, this sign is also used to terminate the lane by
ty and distract users. For these reasons signing and pave-
the addition of the supplementary `END' plate shown in
ment marking schemes for bicycle facilities should be as
Figure 9-1(c).
simple as possible, providing the minimum number of
signs necessary to comply with traffic regulations, to warn
cyclists of potential hazards and to direct cyclists to their 9.2.2. Exclusive Bicycle Path Designation
destinations and services. Where available, signs can be
The sign in Figure 9-2 is used to legally establish a path
erected on existing posts or support structures to reduce provided exclusively for bicycles. It informs pedestrians
costs and the number of potential safety hazards.
and motorists of the purpose of the path and permits traf-
Bicycle facility signs are categorised as:
fic regulations to be enforced. Where necessary, it is also
used in conjunction with the `END' plate in Figure 9-1(c)
regulatory; to terminate the path.
warning; or
guide. 9.2.3. Shared Use Path Designation
The colour used for signs shall comply with those speci- The sign in Figure 9-3 is used at the beginning of shared
fied in AS 1743 Road Signs - Specifications. paths to establish the legal status of the path. It is also used
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 123
b) n No. A9-1-2
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Figure 9-3: Shared Use Path Sign Figure 9-7: Give Way Sign
124 BICYCLES
at the end of these paths in conjunction with a supplemen- 9.2.8. `Bicycles Excepted' Signs
tary `END' plate [Figure 9-1(c)].
The signs in Figure 9-8 are examples of general traffic
signs which are used to prohibit motor vehicles from enter-
9.2.4. Separated Path Designation ing particular streets or areas, usually to improve traffic
flow on a major road or to prevent the intrusion of through
The sign shown in Figure 9-4 is used at the beginning of
traffic into sensitive areas. In most cases these same restric-
paths on which pedestrian and bicycle traffic is intended to
tions should not apply to bicycles in which case the signs
be separated. The areas to be used by each user group are
can be easily modified by the words `BICYCLES
usually indicated by a longitudinal painted line and by the
EXCEPTED' on either the sign or a supplementary plate.
sign. Contrasting surfacing may also be utilised in which
case the painted line may be omitted, but the sign must
always be provided. The sign is also used in conjunction 9.3. Warning Signs
with an `END' plate to terminate the separated path.
Warning signs should only be used where a hazard is not
obvious to approaching drivers and riders and the provi-
9.2.5. Bicycle Prohibition sion of the sign is necessary for safety. If installed, the sign
should be far enough from the hazard to allow for a driver
The sign in Figure 9-5 is used at locations beyond which a or cyclist to react and stop at the operating speed of the
cyclist is not permitted to proceed whilst riding a bicycle. road or path.
9.2.6. Bicycle Control Sign fact that cyclists are likely to be using the road ahead and,
The sign in Figure 9-6 is used at locations where it is nec- when used with the supplementary plate in Figure 9-9(b),
essary to direct cyclists to follow a certain route. that cyclists are likely to be crossing or entering the road
in the vicinity of the sign.
9.2.7. Give Way Sign The sign in Figure 9-9(c) is used to warn cyclists using
off-road paths that they are approaching an intersection
The sign in Figure 9-7 is used in a similar manner as for with a road and should only be used in situations where
roads, predominantly to emphasise `right of way' regula- cyclists cannot identify the presence of an intersection
tions where different path types meet. Under some regula- from a distance which will enable them to stop safely.
tions, it may not have a legal function.
The signs shown in Figure 9-10 might be useful in appro-
The sign can be deployed at intersections of the various priate circumstances. The sign in Figure 9-10(a), together
path types, including footpaths. It is also useful in high- with Figure 9-9(b), warns drivers that cyclists and pedes-
lighting the point where a path meets a road, in the event trians might be encountered at the crossing. The signs in
that the intersection is not obvious under all conditions or Figure 9-10(b) and Figure 9-10(c) are used to warn
if particular concerns exist for the safety of cyclists. cyclists of a steep downhill grade or a slippery surface
respectively.
Give Way signs should also be used at 4-way intersections
of paths, in accordance with the established principles of There are other situations in practice for which Australian
codes of practice for roads. Standard warning signs have not been developed.
Examples of these include warning signs for low clearance along paths between junctions to reassure cyclists that
and flooding in situations where a drainage culvert is they are on the right path. A maximum spacing of 3
utilised as a road or rail underpass for cyclists. Others kilometres is suggested which relates to 12 minutes
would be situations where a path narrows unexpectedly, a cycling at 15 km/h; a reasonable balance between
tight curve is not obvious to cyclists able to approach at cyclists needs and cost;
high speed or where a `blind corner' exists because of
physical constraints on path alignment. In such situations, on the adjacent road system to guide cyclists to a path;
new signs should be designed in accordance with the prin- on paths directing cyclists to important services such
ciples on which the Australian Standard is based. as toilets, water, and food shops; or
9.4. Guide Signs along roads where the bicycle route is not obvious
through pavement marking (e.g. route turns a corner or
Guide signs are very important to cyclists as they define roads are being used to connect sections of path)
the route and provide necessary information to enable
cyclists to conveniently find their way around the network. The importance of these signs becomes evident in using
routes which utilise a number of local streets and off-road
Guide signs are required: paths, and which may follow watercourses, and hence
change direction frequently thus causing cyclists to
at all junctions between paths specifying key destina- become confused as to their location.
tions (e.g. suburbs, universities, recreational facilities
etc.) and distances to those destinations; The bicycle route marker sign shown in Figure 9-11(a) is
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Wi
a) c)
Sign No.
68.15
a) b) c)
m l
all a ion
and parkland it may also be desirable to provide signs of 9.5. Other Useful Signs
an environmentally sensitive design.
A number of other signs that are considered to be useful in
appropriate circumstances, are discussed below. Other
special signs may be required to suit unusual situations.
Figure 9-16: Guide Sign for Cyclists Figure 9-18: Gaps in Deck Sign
128 BICYCLES
The sign shown in Figure 9-19 is a sign used to provide an Tactile linemarking can be used for lines separating
instruction to motorists at locations where it is critical that motor-vehicle traffic lanes and that area of road carriage-
they look out for cyclists. It may be used at the following ways used by cyclists. This is desirable in relation to the
locations where cyclists are experiencing operational or comfort and safety of cyclists where:
safety problems.
curves exist;
where a road or carriageway narrows and creates a
squeeze point for cyclists; high proportion of commercial traffic exists on narrow
carriageways;
at `5 lane' and `S lane' treatments where cyclists are
squeezed for space; or traffic speeds are high;
at the start of diverge tapers and the end of merge visibility of cyclists is poor and limited time or oppor-
tapers. tunity exists to take evasive action in the event of traf-
fic crossing into the section of road used by cyclists; or
It may also be placed below the Stop, Give Way and
Roundabout regulatory signs at intersections to instruct driver fatigue is a potential problem.
motorists that they may encounter a cyclist passing Generally, the 1.8 metre * 1.1 metre bicycle pavement
through the intersection. Typical locations may include the symbol shown in Figure 9-22 is used on roads.
following:
Bicycle pavement symbols should not be applied in
On the approaches to multi-lane roundabouts or large manoeuvring or braking areas of road carriageways (e.g.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Sign No. G9.57 The purpose of the safety strip is to limit the potential use
of the bicycle and/or parking lanes by moving vehicles,
Figure 9-19: `Watch for Bicycles' Sign particularly when the parking demand is minimal. It is
also intended to channel the paths of cyclists away from
cars, to allow for the opening of car doors, or as an addi-
9.6. Pavement Markings tional reminder to drivers as to the potential presence of
Pavement markings include linemarking, pedestrian and cyclists.
bicycle symbols, and arrows. These are used to guide the
With reference to Figure 9-21, a safety strip may consist
movement of bicycle and motor traffic, to provide support
of or be distinguished by the following:
to regulatory signs and as regulatory controls.
a) Diagonal marking in accordance with AS 1742.2, in
9.6.1. Roads the area of the safety strip.
I
Sign and Pavement Symbol Sign and Pavement Symbol
at end of Bicycle Lane IIANE at start of Bicycle Lone
t
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
it
Pavement Symbol at approach Pavement Symbol opposite
side of intersection approach side of junction
Intermediate signs at m
w E
intervals (max.)
C ipeive
pow0wo
NVI
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
In every instance, either an unbroken line or parking space Bicycle and pedestrian symbols, and arrows (refer
markings should be provided between the bicycle lane and Figure 9-22) provide a very useful method of advising
the car parking lane (or area e.g. in the case of angle of the presence of pedestrians and bicycles as well as
parking). the correct use of paths. These markings also reinforce
regulatory path control signs. Generally, the 0.8 metre
9.6.2. Paths *0.49 metre pavement symbol is used for paths.
In general, the linework for paths should conform to the Where necessary the bicycle pavement symbols can be
requirements contained in this guide or with AS 1742.9, as supplemented by directional arrows to indicate the per-
appropriate. Where circumstances exist that are beyond missible directions of travel. This is desirable where path
the provisions of these documents, consideration should volumes are significant, to encourage users to travel on the
be given to common practices used for the marking of left side. With reference to Section 6.6.2.2, it may also be
roads, possibly as prescribed by AS 1742.2 or local codes desirable to supplement pedestrian pavement symbols
of practice. with arrows to indicate the permissible directions of travel.
Off-road paths may utilise the following types of lines. Figure 6-44 details a desirable arrangement of pavement
symbols and arrows used along shared use paths where
A separation line should be used to separate opposing significant path volumes exist.
bicycle traffic movements on heavily trafficked sections
of paths or where sight lines are restricted. They also
serve a valuable function for cyclists riding at night. 9.7. Pavement Surface Colour
An edge line may be used to delineate paths particu- Coloured pavement surfaces are a common feature of
larly where there are frequent and/or low standard bicycle lanes and paths in Europe. Red pavement surfaces
curves, to delineate obstructions and fences etc. at the usually denote a bicycle facility in The Netherlands and
edge of paths, or where paths are well used in dark Germany. Blue pavement surfaces are used in Denmark.
conditions (e.g. by commuters).
It is important that the use of coloured pavement surfaces
A continuity line may be used to delineate the edge of is consistent nationally, or at least throughout a State, to
the path of through bicycle traffic across an intersect- promote recognition of those facilities constructed for the
ing path, or to indicate the end of a path. exclusive use of cyclists, in particular.
A stop line or give way line is desirable at path inter- Care needs to be exercised in the choice of coloured or
sections where it is necessary to provide a Stop sign or textured surfaces. Red and orange are widely used for
a Give Way sign. footpath paving in some States and cities, and as such may
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 131
300mm
E
0E
E
(1) 0E
0
cv
(2)
100 m
1.
Pavement Symbol (1) (2)
for Roads 1800 1100
for Paths 800 490
for Porkin 250 160
Refer AS1742.9 for further detoiis on each of these markings.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
be inappropriate in those regions. A colour/texture combi- The colouring of pavement surfaces are achieved in dif-
nation resulting in a unique surface image and that con- ferent ways. In the case of asphalt surfaced bicycle lanes
trasts with adjoining surfaces, should be the objectives of or paths, coloured binders and/or a light coloured aggre-
the provision of bicycle facilities with alternative surface gate can be used to create the desired appearance.
finishes. The choice of surface image also needs to
account for other factors including aesthetic considera- Concrete paths can be coloured or textured through the use
tions and community opinion. of oxides, pigments or coloured surface hardeners.
Stencilled or patterned concrete surfaces can also be used.
Where provisions for cyclists exist at intersections but Stamped or impressed finishes may not be appropriate
safety problems continue to be a source of frustration, depending on the depth of the impression, due to the affect
consideration could be given to the use of coloured (and on smoothness of the riding surface. It is important that
possibly textured) bicycle lanes, to highlight the position the surface finish be of a skid resistant type.
of bicycle lanes.
On separated paths it is desirable to provide contrasting
Whilst shared use paths can be coloured, they should not surfaces to delineate the areas for cyclists and pedestrians;
be coloured and textured in the same manner as on-road a coloured or textured pavement surface or brick paving
bicycle lanes or exclusive use paths, or with the bicycle might be used. A more highly textured or brick paving sur-
sections of separated use paths. The association of a spe- face would be used for the pedestrian path as it is likely to
cific colour/texture combination with bicycles, on a con- have a rougher finish thus discouraging cyclists from
sistent basis, is an important means of highlighting the encroaching onto the pedestrian path.
potential presence of cyclists.
132 BICYCLES
10.1. General jogging, aerobics, gym work outs), perhaps as part of cor-
porate fitness programs which are of benefit to companies
It is important that adequate facilities are provided at in terms of employee fitness and health.
common destinations of bicycle trips. Bicycle parking
facilities may be installed as a result of the outcomes of Where possible, showers and lockers should be located
Local Strategic Bicycle Plans, urban planning strategies or close to secure bicycle parking facilities.
on a individual demand basis. Necessary facilities include
showers, lockers and parking facilities.
10.3. Parking
10.2. Showers and Lockers 10.3.1. General
The role that cycling could play in replacing the many
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
It
Notes:
1. *-'indicates that no parking demand information is available, and therefore planners should make their own assess-
ment of the required bicycle parking provisions, on an individual project basis.
2, gfa - Gross floor area.
3. It is sometimes appropriate to make available 50% of the level of provision recommended in the table at the initial
installation stage, however space should be set aside to allow 100% provision in the event that the full demand for
bicycle parking is realised.
Source: Bawd on SBC 195Th
Provision of secure bicycle parking facilities is necessary shopping centres or in small clusters near the entrances
if the level of theft and the cost to the community is to be to major shopping complexes or offices.
reduced.
In public areas, especially in prominent locations, every
endeavour should be made to provide attractive, well
10.3.3. General Requirements of Devices
designed facilities. The need for an aesthetic appearance
In general every bicycle parking device should: should not, however, override the requirements for securi-
ty and ease of use.
enable wheels and frame to be locked to the device
without damaging the bicycle; 10.3.5. Types of Parking Devices
be placed in public view (i.e. where they can be viewed
There are three classes of bicycle parking facilities that
by passers-by, shopkeepers, station attendants, teach- offer various levels of security, from high to low. These
ers or fellow workers); classes and the main types of user are described in Table
be located outside pedestrian movement paths; 10-2. Bicycle parking devices that do not allow the frame
and both wheels to be conveniently and effectively locked
be easily accessible from the road; to the facility cannot be regarded as secure.
be arranged so that parking and unparking manoeuvres
will not damage adjacent bicycles; Security
Clas Description Main User Type
Level
I
be protected from manoeuvring motor vehicles and
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Bicycle parking facilities should be provided at common Law Facilities to which Shoppers, visitors
commuting and recreational destinations of bicycle trips. the bicycle frame to public offices.
These locations include schools, shopping centres, railway and wheels can be Places of
stations, bus terminals and interchanges, work places, locked. employment
sports grounds, cafe's, cinemas, theatres etc.. Secure, long where there is
term, weather protected parking should be provided for
workers and multi mode commuters, and secure short term supervision of the
parking should be provided for visitors, customers or parking facilities.
couriers. The locations of these facilities should be identi-
fied on bicycle network maps made available to the public. Table 10-2: Classification of Bicycle Parking Facilities
If parking facilities are not conveniently located cyclists (a) The Bicycle Locker
will ignore the facility and continue the disorderly practice
of securing bicycles to nearby railings, posts, seats, parking Bicycle lockers such as those shown in Figure 10-3 offer
meters, trees etc. Short-term parking, in particular, needs to the highest level of bicycle parking security currently
be very convenient if it is to be effective. Parking facilities available. They are appropriate for all day and night park-
are more effective if provided in small clusters close to var- ing, the most common venue being railway stations and
ious destinations rather than as one large parking area. bus terminals to encourage the use of multi mode travel.
They should also be considered at other locations where
Experience has shown that: passive surveillance is not available. They have the added
advantage that helmets and other gear can be securely
long term parking should generally be provided no
more than 100 metres from the cyclists destination; stored along with the bicycle, perhaps overnight, thus
giving the cyclists more flexibility in their travel arrange-
and
ments. It is important that the use of lockers is managed by
parking rails for short term parking should be placed an appropriate authority such as the managers of the rele-
individually every 20 to 30 metres throughout strip vant shopping centre, major building or railway station.
END OF TRIP FACILITIES 135
Users of bicycle lockers should not be allowed to supply It is recommended that lockers of similar size and layout
their own locks as lockers may end up being appropriated to those shown in Figure 10-3(b), be arranged so that the
by occasional users and remain empty and locked. It is separation between locker units is not less than 2.0 metres.
essential that those responsible for the management of the
lockers supply the locks for a fee, retain a duplicate key to (b) Bicycle Enclosure
enable regular checking of the usage, and maintain a reg- Bicycle enclosures offer a medium level of security in that
ister of regular users. Alternatively, a coin deposit operat- while the owner can lock the bicycle within the enclosure,
ed system may be preferred although this will not remove other users also have access to the enclosure. They are also
the need for occasional checking of usage. suitable for all day parking at locations such as railway
Lockers should normally be situated in a well lit public stations, workplaces and schools. Because there are many
place to deter vandalism. Lockers used in locations close users involved and the bicycles are easily seen they are not
to the sea should be fabricated from materials that will as secure as lockers and hence some level of surveillance
resist corrosion. should be provided to ensure satisfactory operation. Public
lighting is desirable where they are located in a public
place and used after dark.
Horizontal Storage*
90° angle 1,5
60° angle 1,3
45° angle 1,1
30° angle 1.1
View A
NOTE: May be enclosed in cage with door and communal tock
provided bicycles can be secured Individually
SwxmAS2W,3
These devices are successful largely because cyclists can standard car parking spaces where use is converted to
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
lock the frame and wheels to the rail if they so desire. The bicycle parking (refer Figure 10-13).
ability to locate them in well lit public places results in a rea-
sonable level of security even without organised surveil-
lance. Care must be taken in locating the rails so that they do
not unnecessarily restrict pedestrian movement along foot-
paths or impede opening of the doors of parked cars. They
W
should also be located with motorists sight lines in mind.
11
A I
E
E
ie
1700
1700 1700
C z/ ,, / i I .._../_ ./
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
WaII d Fence 1
Parking Angle
1
as shown in
Table 10-3
Wall or Fe
/9-
r1
Kerb
Carriageway
a) NOSE TO TAIL
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
SHOP SUPERMARKET
Parking
Kerb
c way Z
Clearance to centre fine of rail
1 600 adjacent to low sp road (ac 60 h)
1800 adjacent to high speed road (> 60kmfi)
or parked vehicles (ie no indented parking)
b) SIDE BY SIDE
Figure 10-11 shows the space module required for bicy- Where a parking rail is used for long term parking, say at
cles to be parked nose-to-tail and side by side whilst a railway station, the public transport authority should
Figure 10-12 shows typical layouts for the use of leaning provide a chain and padlock guard designed to prevent the
rails on footpaths. Other arrangements may be considered chain or padlock being cut with bolt cutters.
provided they are designed in accordance with the module,
clearances and aisle widths described above. For example, Where bicycle parking is required and a wall exists
a radial arrangements may be appropriate at a recreational nearby, an effective device is a horizontal parking rail
centre depending on the space available. fixed directly to the wall enabling the bicycle to be leant
140 BICYCLES
170 0
1700
P *ng Rob
""vow
--*--
both SWOS "f-
Sq
ble Padift
)
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
1I: s4ctes
AS 2M3
against the rail, with a bracket mounted at the correct not meet the requirements of this guide and AS 2890.3
height to facilitate locking, as shown in Figure 10-14. These installations should be replaced progressively
giving priority to those where the security risk is greatest.
(d) Other Acceptable Parking Devices Specific problems related to these types of racks and
The road authority, planning authority, developer or owner stands are:
may wish to install alternative commercially available as only the front wheel can be secured to the rack the
bicycle parking devices. These parking devices may be remainder of the bicycle can be easily stolen;
satisfactory provided if they are designed and installed in
accordance with the principles of good practice described some traditional racks intended for a number of bicy-
above. For example, some councils have shown an interest cles to be parked side by side are used by cyclists as a
in providing coin operated devices which can be set to any leaning rail in order to achieve greater security thus
desired fee or to return a nominal fee after use. They preventing the device from being used as intended;
should be designed as to minimise the opportunity of theft.
It is suggested that any fee should be small or cyclists will they do not provide adequate stability for the bicycles
not use the facility and as a consequence may park their and can result in damage to the bicycles; and
bicycles in undesirable locations. devices having slots in the ground often have dirt and
(e) Unacceptable Parking Devices debris fill the slot making them difficult to use.
A variety of racks and stands have been used over a long 10.3.6. Signs and Markings Showing Location
period of time. However, racks and stands which allow and Purpose of Parking Facilities
only one wheel to be locked to the device or which support
the bicycle by only one wheel are not recommended for Signs should be provided to direct cyclists to storage units or
use. Such devices do not provide proper support or securi- devices and thus encourage their use. Storage units and other
ty for the bicycle as a whole. They do not meet the require- devices, the purpose of which may not be immediately obvi-
ments of AS 2890.3 and should not be used in new instal- ous (e.g. rails), must have instructional signs. Maps and pam-
lations. It is recognised that many existing installations do phlets can be produced to publicise the location of facilities.
END OF TRIP FACILITIES 141
In
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
fts VPIW On
x rrl$n
s
Figure 10-15: Information Signs for Bicycle Parking Facilities
142 BICYCLES
1 00- 1
Does the design avoid or minimise the need for cyclists Are smooth and flat gutters/channels provided at
to slow or stop (sect. 3.4)? stormwater drainage pit inlets?
Do hazardous conditions (e.g. concealed intersecting Is the riding surface free of loose materials (e.g. sand,
paths, curves) exist at the bottom of steep gradients? gravel, broken glass, concrete spills)?
Are all necessary regulatory, warning and direction Is the riding surface generally free of areas where
signs provided and located appropriately? Are they ponding or flow of water may occur?
conspicuous and clear in their intent? Are they at a safe Is special protection required to prevent cyclists from
distance/height with respect to the riding surface? running off the riding surface (sect. 7.6.2)?
Are signs in good condition and of an appropriate
standard? A.3.4 Vegetation, Maintenance and Construction
Are there any redundant signs? Is suitable access for cycling available during mainte-
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
A.3.3 Riding Surface Does landscaping allow adequate clearances, sight dis-
tance etc, and will these be maintained given mature
Is riding surface suitable for cycling? plant growth (also see sect. 3.2)?
Is the riding surface and edges, smooth and free of Could personal security of path users be adversely
defects (e.g. grooves, ruts or steps) which could affect affected due to the position of bushes and other land-
the stability of cyclists or cause wheel damage (sect. scape features?
8.5.1)?
Is landscaping required as a wind break?
Is the pavement design/construction of a satisfactory
standard (sect. 8.5.2)? Will the positioning of trees and the species used con-
tribute to the degradation of the pavement (e.g. through
Can utility service covers, grates, drainage pits etc., be undermining or moisture variation)?
safely negotiated by cyclists (sect. 8.2)?
APPENDIX A 145
A.3.5 Traffic Signals Are there any potential problems of conflict between
the various path users (e.g. pedestrians and cyclists)?
Are separate pedestrian and/or bicycle phases provid-
ed where necessary? Is path subject to flooding? If so, are warning signs
provided and located appropriately (sect. 6.3.8)?
Do traffic signals operate correctly? Are signal dis-
plays located appropriately for all users? A.4.2 Alignment and Cross-Section
Does the design of the signals prevent conflicting Where paths are located adjacent roads, is there suffi-
motor vehicle movements during crossing phases for cient separation and/or protection from the carriage-
pedestrians and cyclists? way (sect. 6.5.2)?
Where a permanent demand for individual phases does Are adequate overtaking opportunities provided?
not exist, have suitable detection facilities been pro-
vided for cyclists? Are these operating satisfactorily Is the path width, at structures or otherwise, adequate
(sect. 5.4.1)? for the likely usage levels of pedestrians and cyclists
(sect. 6.6/7.4)?
Are inductive detector loops provided for bicycle
users, are they located appropriately, of a suitable Is the geometric alignment and gradient satisfactory
design and do they operate correctly for bicycles in the (sect. 6.3)?
various stopping positions (sect. 5.4.1)?
Is the design speed appropriate (sect. 6.3.1)?
If push-button actuators have been provided, are they
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
located to allow convenient and legal operation from Is path crossfall suitable for the anticipated path users
the normal stopping position (e.g. on left of riding sur- (sect. 6.3.8)?
face or kerb ramp, behind stop line)? Do they operate
correctly (sect. 5.4.1(c))? A.4.3 Intersections
Are phasing and phase times acceptable? Are suitable If justified, is path priority assigned to path users at
warning signs or guidance for cyclists erected where road crossings (sect. 6.7.2.1)?
intersection crossing times are insufficient (sect.
At intersections with busy roads, are appropriate facili-
5.4.3)?
ties provided, e.g. traffic signals, underpass, overpass or
median refuge, to allow path users to safely cross (sect.
A.3.6 Physical Objects 6.7.2.3)? Are the intersection controls satisfactory?
Are fences, guard rail or other objects located adjacent Is the location of road/path or path/path intersections
to the path(s) of cyclists free of sharp edges, exposed satisfactory and obvious with respect to horizontal and
elements or corners to minimise the risk of injury in vertical alignment?
the event of being struck by a cyclist (sect. 7.6.2)?
Is the presence of intersections obvious to road/path
If there are any obstructions located adjacent to the users?
paths of cyclists, are they adequately delineated (sect.
6.3.5/7.6.2)? Is a refuge required at road crossings? Would it
adversely affect (e.g. squeeze) cyclists travelling along
Are clearances to the operating space of cyclists the road?
acceptable (sect. 3.2/6.3.5/7.6.2)?
In relation to path entry controls:
Are holding rails provided? Are they positioned so as Are Local Area Traffic Management treatments appro-
to not unduly interfere with access for cyclists and priate for bicycles (sect. 4.7)?
other users (consider tandem bicycles, bicycles with
trailers etc. - sect. 6.7.3.2)? Do drainage pits require treatment because road sur-
facing has been deferred (sect. 8.2)?
Are the controls associated with path/path intersec-
tions satisfactory (sect. 6.8)? Is the positioning of bicycle pavement symbols poten-
tially hazardous to motor-cyclists?
A.5 Roads Are sealed shoulders at least as smooth as traffic lanes?
This section should be read in conjunction with Section A.3.
A.5.2 Intersections
A.5.1 General Are the intersection treatments appropriate (sect. 5)?
Are bicycle lanes required (sect. 2.4.1.2/4.3.1) Are there any common cyclist movements (legal or
otherwise) that differ from typical traffic movements?
Are bicycle lane or the left traffic lane widths adequate
Are these likely to be anticipated by other traffic? Can
to accommodate cyclists (sect. 4.4)? Can sufficient
these movements be made safely and if not what reme-
space be obtained (sect. 4.3.2)? Are there any squeeze
dial measures are required (sect. 5.2)?
points for cyclists?
Are `head start' storage areas required due to conflict-
Does the construction of the lane facility conform to
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
. .. -.
The signing and delineation of construction and mainte- With reference to Figure B-1, where adequate provision
nance works on roads and footpaths should be performed for cyclists is not possible on a road, access along a path
in accordance with Australian Standard AS 1742.3 and in the area of the roadside verge may be appropriate.
any relevant local codes of practice and regulations. In Provided adequate separation from the work area can be
general, provision for works on paths should be made in maintained, it is generally acceptable to initiate and termi-
accordance with the principles of these standards. nate the roadside verge bicycle access within the road lane
Additional consideration of cyclists should be made in transition zones either side of the work area.
accordance with the details set out below.
For paths, reference should be made to Section 6.6 (in
Section 8 highlights a range of issues that are important to relation to paths located away from road reserves) and to
cyclists in relation to construction and maintenance works. 6.6.2 (separated paths) where temporary roadside verge
As a principle objective of provision for cyclists adjacent access is required. The controls highlighted in these sec-
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
to the works site, the riding surface should be maintained tions are applicable to temporary paths.
in a clean and smooth state. This may necessitate sweep-
ing of the riding surface on at least a daily basis. Containment fences should be provided in accordance
with the requirements of AS 1742.3, and otherwise as
Figures B-1, B-2 and B-3 highlight the desired level of required by Section 7.6.2. These may be appropriate to
provision required in the vicinity of works, depending on separate pedestrians and cyclists where a footpath is to be
the circumstances. The actual provisions to be made are used for access by cyclists, and where:
dependent on the conditions that exist, including:
significant pedestrian or bicycle volumes exist; or
presence of a traffic controller;
safety issues may arise due to the unexpected use of a
existing level of bicycle use, and also of pedestrian use footpath by cyclists.
in the case of shared use path diversions;
Examples of provisions for paths located adjacent roads
available opportunities to provide for cyclists; and in reserves are shown in Figures B-2 and B-3
road or path alignment; respectively.
traffic speeds and volumes; Temporary paths should be sealed. Whilst dependent on
circumstances, such as bicycle volumes, safety and the
duration of work; extent of inconvenience to cyclists, this may be unneces-
sary where:
surface material and condition; and
environmental impacts. the works are carried out over a short period (e.g. less
than 2 or 3 weeks duration);
Provision for cyclists on roads should be made in the fol-
lowing circumstances: temporary path surface is firm, smooth and free of
thorns;
where bicycle lanes exist;
the works are carried out during dry weather condi-
arterial roads; tions; and
collector roads, with an AADT in excess of 3000 vehi- path traffic is minimal.
cles per day; or
However, it is very desirable that temporary paths are
strategic and other significant bicycle routes. sealed and delineated where works are carried out over
longer periods. Separated paths should be suitably delin-
Safety Barriers should be provided where required by AS eated regardless of the period of construction.
1742.3, and are generally appropriate where cyclists or
pedestrians are detoured onto roads. Temporary (lower) Where works on paths are carried out for a period exceed-
speed limits may also be appropriate in this circumstance. ing one day, the works should be made sufficiently visible
148 BICYCLES
Gyrists' route
Works Site
CYCUSTS+j *CYCLISTSSj
Works Site
Figure B-2: Works on Paths adjacent Roads - Shared Use Path Diversion
CYCu
4 PEDESTRIANS j
for night time path travel, so that path users are able to
observe conditions under low ambient light conditions
including temporary access paths, and take appropriate
action. In addition, as a general principle, lighting on tem-
porary access paths should not be less than the existing
level on the original path.
Appendix C
Human Powered Vehicles
Although the bicycle is the standard vehicle for the design The following vehicle dimensions may be helpful as a
of facilities, the use of tandem bicycles, tricycles and other guide:
`pedal powered vehicles' may be popular in some areas
and an allowance for these vehicles may be appropriate in
the design of some facilities (see sect. 3.2).
Recumbent Touring
There is limited information available on the needs, and
operating characteristics of these vehicles, and in particular
on their performance from the perspective of road and path
design, or in relation to traffic management and safety.
Additional length of some HPV's may *Based on smallest possible turning path at a stable speed. Radius
itate s ial consideration. measured either to the shoulder of a cyclist or to a bicycle element.
Ii
_
Allott & Lomax, (1993), Cyclists and Roundabouts, A Bovy P. H. L. and Bradley M. A. (1985), Route Choice
Review of Literature. 2nd Edition. Report for the Cyclist's Analysed with Stated Preference Approaches. Transport
Touring Club, UK Research Record 1037.
Andrew O'Brien & Assoc. (1996), Review of Guide to Brude & Larsson (1997), The Safety of Cyclists at
Traffic Engineering Practice - Part 14 - Bicycles, State Roundabouts - a comparison between Swedish, Danish
Bicycle Committee, Vic and Dutch Results, Swedish National Road and Transport
Research Institute (VTI)
AUSBIKE 92, Proceedings of a National Bicycle
Conference, Melbourne, Australia, March 1992. Californian Department of Transportation (1995),
Californian Highway Design Manual: Chapter 1000
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1991), Census of Bikeway Planning and Design.
Population and Housing, Basic Community Profiles (by
State and Nationally) Cement & Concrete Association (C&CAA, 1996), Rider
Comfortable Concrete Dual Use Pathways - A Practical
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1988), Bicycle Usage and Guide for the Construction Supervisor.
Safety, New South Wales.
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
AASHTO (1991), Guide for the Development of Bicycle Cross K. D. and Fisher G. A. (1977), Study of
Facilities. Published by the American Association of State Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Accidents, NHTSA, DOT-MS-4-
Highway and Transportation Officials. 00982.
AUSTROADS (1994), Road Safety Audit, AP-30/94, Crossing, (1987), The Child Cyclist, State Bicycle
AUSTROADS Sydney Committee of New South Wales, Traffic Authority of New
South Wales
AUSTROADS, (1996), Urban Speed Management in
Australia, API 18, AUSTROADS Sydney Dorrestyn & Co Pty Ltd, (1998), Means of Assisting
Bicyclists at Signalised Intersections, Transport SA
AUSTROADS (1999), Australia Cycling - The National
Strategy 1999 - 2004 Department of Transport (DOT, 1996), Further Development
of Advanced Stop Lines, Traffic Advisory Unit.
AUSTROADS, Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice
Parts 1 to 14, AUSTROADS Sydney. Geelong Bikeplan Committee (1984), Bicycle Planning in
Australia
Balsiger O. (1992), To Plan for Cycling is to Encourage it,
The Bicycle: Global Perspectives, Conference Velo Godefrooij, (1992), Criteria for Segregation and
Mondiale, Montreal, Velo Quebec Integration of Different Modes of Transport, The Bicycle:
Global Perspectives, Conference Velo Mondiale,
Bicycle Victoria (1996), It Can Be Done, A Bicycle Montreal, Velo Quebec
Network on Arterial Roads
Hoffman, Payne And Prescott (1978). Children's
Brude & Larsson (1997), The Safety of Cyclists at Estimates of Vehicle Approach Times. Session 7, Paper No
Roundabouts - a Comparison between Swedish, Danish 3, Joint Australian Road Research Board and Department
and Dutch results. Swedish National Road and Transport of Transport Pedestrian Conference, Sydney, 1978.
Research Institute
Hudson M (1982), Bicycle Planning: Policy and Practice.
Jorgensen N. O. (1990), Roundabouts - Flow improve- Architectural Press, London.
ment or Speed Reduction. PTRC Summer Meeting 1990.
Hughes, T (1998), Submission on Review of
BIKEWEST (1992), Guidelines for the Design of Bicycle AUSTROADS Part 14, Land Transport Safety Authority,
Facilities, Department of Transport, Western Australia. New Zealand
REFERENCES 153
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America RP-8 Robinson, D.L. (1998), Accidents at Roundabouts in
(1983), American National Standard Practice for Roadway New South Wales. Road and Transport Research, vol 7,
Lighting, pp 8 & 9. no. 1, 3-12
INSTAT (1988), Day-to-Day Travel in Australia 1985-86, Sandels S. (June 1974) The Skandia Report II, Why Are
Report No. CR69, Federal Office of Road Safety, Children Injured In Traffic? A Skandia publication,
February 1988. Sweden.
Insurance Council of Australia (1987), Bulletin July 1987,
Shepherd, R (1994), Road and Path Quality for Cyclists,
Stolen Push-bikes: Like trying to find a needle in a Proceedings of 17th ARRB Conference, Gold Coast, QLD
haystack.
STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA.
Jordan P. (1986), Pedestrians and Cyclists at Roundabouts,
(1986a), Australian Standard Manual of Uniform Traffic
Proceedings 3rd National Local Government Engineers Control Devices, AS 1742 Part 1: General Introduction
Conference.
and Index of Signs (1991) and Part 9: Bicycle Facilities
(1986). SAA, Sydney.
Layfield R. E. and Maycock G. (June 1986) Traffic
Engineering and Control, pp 343 - 349. STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA. (1990),
Australian Standard AS 1742.10, Manual of Uniform
Leschinski, R (1994), Bicycle Detection at Signalised Traffic Control Devices Part 10: Pedestrian Control &
Intersections, Australian Road Research Board Protection
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Lines, CJ (1995, UK), Cycle Accidents at Signalised STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA. (1993),
Roundabouts. Traffic Engineering and Control, vol 36, no. Australian Standard AS 1428.1, Design for Access and
2,74-5,77 Mobility, Part 1 - General Requirements for Access -
Buildings
Loder & Bayly Pty Ltd (1989), Width of Kerbside Lanes
for Cyclists, Report prepared for the Bicycle Co- STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA.
ordination Unit of VicRoads. (1986b), Australian Standard 1158.0 - Public Lighting
Code Introduction, Sydney
McHenry & Wallace (1985), Evaluation of Wide Curb
STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA. (1993),
Lanes as Shared Bicycle Facilities, Maryland Department
Australian Standard 2890.3 - Manual of Parking Facilities
of Transport
Part 3: Bicycle Parking Facilities, Sydney.
McLean, J (1997), Review of Accidents and Rural Cross State Bicycle Committee of Victoria (1987a), Survey of
Section Elements including Roadsides. ARRB Transport Cyclists Characteristics and Cycling Patterns, prepared for
Research, Research Report ARR 297. the Ministry of Transport by Spectrum Research.
Mathieson J.G. (1991), Bicyclist Trauma: Causes, Costs State Bicycle Committee of Victoria (1987b), Bicycle
and Countermeasures. Cyclists and Law Compliance Facilities, Planning and Design Guidelines, Victoria
Seminar, Geelong, Victoria, April 1991. Transport.
National Bicycle Strategy, Federal Department of Sustrans (1997), The National Cycle Network Guidelines
Transport and Communications, Land Transport Policy and Practical Details, Issue 2, Ove Arup & Partners
Division, 1993.
Van Minnen, J. (1992), Roundabouts - Safe For Cyclists
Oregon Department of Transportation (1992), Oregon Too?, SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, The
Bicycle Plan. Published by The Technical Services Netherlands. Still More Bikes Behind The Dykes pp 247 -
258.
Branch, Oregon Department of Transportation.
Van Minnen, J (1996), Safety of Bicycles on Roundabouts
Ove Arup and Partners (1989), Urban Freeway Cycling Deserves Special Attention. SWOV Institute for Road
Study. Produced for VicRoads and the Roads and Traffic Safety Research
Authority of New South Wales.
Velo Quebec (1992), Technical Handbook of Bikeway
Parker, A. (1992) , The Green City, How to Marry Design. Ministere des Transports du Quebec and the
Bicycles and Rail, Australian Cyclist, Volume 16, No 3, Canadian International Development Agency.
June - July 1992.
Vic Roads (1991), Victorian Bicycle Strategy.
Information Retrieval
Kfl WORDS.
Bicycle Itoad Usez ¶fltffic Lane Bicycle Path, Cycling, Multi Mode
Intersections, Faking Traffic Island
been published
Part 14 - a ofthe 1993 publication ft incorporates
the latest practice in the provision of road and path facilities for cyclists
Part 14 provides an overview ef planning for cyclists in relation to the different
levels of and includes thscussions on the role of cycling in transport
and integrated land useplanmug It details the technical requirements for designing
roads and paths for safe and efficient cycling Guidelines are provided on the
choice of bicycle facilities, the design of road and road/path intersections, traffic
control devices, pavement design provision It bicycles at and provi
stons associated with the construction and maintenance of roads and paths in rela-
tion to cycling Guidelines are also provided on the requirements for bicycle park-
ing and other end of facilities
AUSTROADS Publications
Austroads publishes a large number of guides and reports. Some of its more recent
publications are:
AP-1/89 Rural Road Design
AP-2/90 Design of Sprayed Seals
AP-8/87 Visual Assessment of Pavement Condition
AP- 12/91 Road Maintenance Practice
AP- 13/91 Bridge Management Practice
AP- 14/91 Guide to Bridge Construction Practice
AP- 15/96 Australian Bridge Design Code
AP- 17/92 Pavement Design
AP-18/96 RoadFacts 96
AP-22/95 Strategy for Pavement Research and Development
AP-23/94 Waterway Design, A Guide to the Hydraulic Design of Bridges, Culverts & Floodways
AP-30/94 Road Safety Audit
AP-36/95 Adaptions and Innovations in Road & Pavement Engineering
AP-40/95 Strategy for Ecological Sustainable Development
AP-41/96 Bitumen Sealing Safety Guide
Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Part 14-Bicycles
Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice
SAA HB69.14-99
AP-14-11/99