Cycle Notes Widths of Off-Road Shared Use Paths
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NO. 21 - JUNe 2010 Cycle Notes Widths of Off-Road Shared Use Paths Welcome to CYCLE NOTES No. 21. The purpose of CYCLE NOTES is to provide information on the design of bicycle facilities for engineers and planners. CYCLE NOTES should be read in conjunction with: Austroads Guides to Traffic Management and Road Design. Australian Standard 1742.9, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Part 9 Bicycle Facilities. VicRoads Traffic Engineering Manual Volumes 1 and 2. Introduction Passings and Meetings The purpose of this edition of Cycle Notes is to provide When cyclists and pedestrians are using a shared path, guidance on the width of off-road shared use paths. In they will often “meet” other cyclists and pedestrians particular, it relates the widths of paths to the volume of travelling in the opposite direction or “pass” slower cyclists cyclists and pedestrians who use the path. and pedestrians travelling in the same direction. Guidance is also provided on the circumstances under Delayed Passings which consideration should be given to separating cyclists Delayed passings occur when faster cyclists must slow from pedestrians. down to pass other path users travelling in the same direction. This usually occurs when a “passing” happens Shared Use Paths at the same time as a “meeting” and there is insufficient Shared use paths are the most common form of off road room for the faster cyclist to pass the slower path users. path in Australia and are based on cyclists and pedestrians The number of delayed passings that occur along a path is sharing the path (Figure 1). dependent upon the volume of path users, cyclist speed, As the volumes of cyclists and pedestrians using shared direction of travel and path width. use paths increase, there is often a reduction in the level In particular, the number of delayed passings increase of service and safety for all path users. significantly as the volume of pedestrians increase due to To address this situation, paths may be widened or cyclists the speed differential between cyclists and pedestrians. may be separated from pedestrians by providing a bicycle only path and a footpath. Figure 2 – Typical interactions of path users on shared use paths. Figure 1 – Off-road, shared use paths are common in Australia and provide maximum separation for cyclists. keeping victorians connected 2 Cycle Notes Assessing Path Capacity and Selecting Commuter Path – Directional Split – 90/10 Path Widths Example – Main Yarra 200 Introduction Trail (north bank) at Morell Bridge The following procedure can be followed to assess the The three basic inputs that must be considered when 180 capacity of existing paths, to determine if existing paths assessing path capacity are the numbers of pedestrians This path is 3.0 metres need to be upgraded and to select an appropriate width and cyclists using the path in the “design hour” and the wide. It carries 550 cyclists 160 for a new path. “directional split”. and 80 pedestrians during the AM peak period. The 3.0m shared path 3.0m bike path 4.0m 1.5m footpath bike path “directional split” is 90/10. 140 The design hour for the path is the hour during which 1.5m As shown the intersection Step 1 it is most desirable to minimise delays for cyclists. footpath of the two lines is within the Determine the “design hour” for the path 120 The design hour may be the AM peak hour on a zone for a 3.0m shared path. weekday for commuter paths, it may be sometime As a result it could be 100 on a weekend for recreational paths or it may the concluded that the capacity hour during which the most numbers of people are of this path exceeds its using the path. It is up to the designer or the path 80 demand. manager to determine the design hour. 60 40 No. of pedestrians (two-way per peak hour) of pedestrians (two-way No. Step 2 While pedestrians are normally counted manually, 20 cyclists may be counted manually or by automatic Count the numbers of pedestrians and cyclists 2.5m shared path counting methods such as tube counters or using the path a the design hour and their direction 0 inductive loops. of travel. 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 No. of cyclists (two-way per peak hour) Figure 3 - Path capacity for paths with 90/10 directional split. “Directional split” is an indication of the proportion Recreational Path – Directional Split – 50/50 Step 3 of path users that are going in each direction. This Example – Bay Trail, 200 Determine the directional split of path users. can be calculated by dividing the numbers of path St Kilda users going in each direction by the total number This path consists of path users. It is usually expressed as a percentage. 180 of a 2.5 metre wide Commuter paths typically have a directional split bicycle path and a 1.5 of 90/10 which means that 90% of path users are metre wide footpath. 160 going in one direction and 10% are going in the 2.5m bike path 3.0m bike path 4.0m other direction. It carries 200 cyclists and 1.5m footpath 1.5m footpath bike path 140 100 pedestrians during the Recreational paths are more likely to be 50/50 1.5m weekend peak hour. The where path users are going in both directions in footpath “directional split” is 50/50. 120 equal amounts and the directional split is a more even or balanced. As shown the intersection 100 of the two lines is just outside the zone for a 3.0m shared path and 80 Step 4 To determine the appropriate path width: just inside the zone for a Determine the appropriate path width for the (a) select the graph to use – Figure 3 for paths separated path. 60 number of pedestrians and cyclists using the with a 90/10 directional split or Figure 4 for path and the directional split. paths with a 50/50 directional split; As a result it could be concluded that the 40 (b) locate the number of pedestrians on the left side 3.0m shared path capacity of this path per peak hour) of pedestrians (two-way No. or “y-axis of the appropriate graph and draw a also exceeds its demand horizontal line across the graph from this point; 20 at this location. (c) locate the number of cyclists along the bottom 2.5m shared path or “x” axis of the graph and draw a vertical line. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 The zone within which these two lines intersect No. of cyclists (two-way per peak hour) corresponds to the width that the path should be. Figure 4 - Path capacity for paths with 50/50 directional. 4 Cycle Notes Width of Cyclists and Pedestrians and Commuter Paths and Recreational Paths Clearances to Other Path Users 0.15m 0.7m 0.3m 0.7m 0.15m Figure 5: Minimum path width to Commuter Paths – 90/10 Directional Split Figure 9 provides an indication of the volumes of For the purposes of estimating path widths, cyclists and allow a passing or a meeting. pedestrians and cyclists that are using some of Paths that have a 90/10 directional split produce fewer pedestrians are assumed to be about 0.7m wide and Melbourne’s more popular shared use commuter paths delayed passings and have a higher capacity than paths require a minimum clearance of 0.15m on each side. and the width of those paths. with a 50/50 directional split. When passing or meeting other path users, this results As indicated, most of these paths have sufficient capacity in a minimum clearance of 0.3m between users. This is because the number of passings and meetings that for the volumes of cyclists and pedestrians that are using occur at the same time are fewer when most path users As a result, the minimum width for a shared use path the paths at the moment. are travelling in the same direction. to allow a meeting or a passing is 2.0m (Figure 5). The minimum width to allow a passing and a meeting is 3.0m 2.0m 800 (Figure 6) and the minimum width to allow passings in 4.0m both directions is 4.0m (Figure 7). Figure 6: Minimum path 700 width to allow a passing A consequence of this is that paths that are between 3.0m and a meeting. and 4.0m allow greater clearances between path users 600 (and a slightly higher LOS), but are unlikely to reduce the number of delayed passings. 500 Also, if there is sufficient space for a 4.0m wide shared 400 path, the provision of a 1.5m wide footpath and a 2.5m 3.0m wide bicycle path may provide a better outcome. Docklands Path (3.0m) 300 Footscray Road Path (3.0m) Figure 7: Gardiners Creek @ MainYarra Trail (2.5m) Minimum 200 St Georges Road South (3.0m) Main Yarra Trail Northbank (3.0m) path width Figure 9: Volumes of pedestrians to allow and cyclists on various shared use Upfield 100 Tram 109 Path (2.2m) passings commuter paths in Melbourne. Trail (3.0m) 3.0m in both Directional split - 90/10. per hour) of pedestrians (two-way No. 2.5m directions. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 4.0m Modelling Path Use – Cyclist and No. of cyclists (two-way per hour) Pedestrian Volumes and Path Width The frequency of meetings, passings and delayed passings It has been assumed that 12 delayed passings per hour that occur along a path is dependant on the volumes of represents the upper limit of cyclists’ tolerance for being Recreational Paths – path users and the direction of travel (split).