“Implementation of Cycle Path in Urban Area”
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
“IMPLEMENTATION OF CYCLE PATH IN URBAN AREA” Faculty Of Civil And Environmental Engineering Course Of Transport System Engineering Candidate Giorgio Grappasonni 1388931 Supervisor: Prof. Ing. Paola Di Mascio Co Supervisor: Prof. Ing. Gaetano Fusco External Superviso: Dott. Fausto Bonafaccia A/A 2016/2017 INDEX INTRODUCTION 2 CHAPTER 1: Critical analysys of cycling infrastructures regulations. 4 American Regulation 5 Spanish Regulation 12 Danish Regulation 16 Italian Regulation 19 CHAPTER 2: Italian Cycling network classification. 22 City of Rome 30 CHAPTER 3: Pre-feasibility study of a cycle Path in Rome. 38 CHAPTER 4: Technical Characteristics of the path. 60 Piazza Gentile da Fabriano/ Lungotevere 64 Piazza Apollodoro 73 Piazzale Manila 84 Via delle Belle Arti/ Via Flaminia intersection 96 Piazzale Flaminio intersection 105 CHAPTER 5: Conclusions 111 BIBLIOGRAPHY SOURCES AND SITOGRAPHY. 116 THANKS 118 1 INTRODUCTION The concept of road safety is very complex. It provides for precautionary measures depending on the type of transport involved. Therefore, both private and public motor vehicles will be considered, as well as bikes. In the following table four different European Capitals are taken as examples. Each one is characterized by a different extension and the population varies with it. Data refer to year 2007. Cities Rome London Paris Barcelona Population 2,718,770 7,557,000 2,153,600 1,595,110 Area [Km^2] 1,285 1,570 105.4 101 Road Network [Km] 5,000 14,926 1,644 1,281 Motorized Vehicle 2,660,202 3,010,000 893,300 991,151 Freight Vehicles 182,397 21,000 117,700 73,491 Cars 1,897,672 2,497,000 673,600 617,022 Moped and motorcycles 535,997 116,000 102,000 278671 Other Vehicles 44,294 376,000 - 278,671 Motorization rate [x1000 inh.] 978 398 415 621 N° of accidents 19,960 23,210 8,019 9,834 N° of deaths 201 222 35 43 N° of injuries 26,299 28,361 9,205 12,824 Mortality rate 74 29 16 27 The city of Rome is the second in terms of extension and number of motorized vehicles. The percentage of moped and motorcycle is the highest among the cities analyzed: 20.15% It is a high value, considering that there is no mobility plan in Italy that involves PTW (Powered two- wheelers) between the dominant units. It is estimated that 1 to 5 people has a motorbike or a moped. The rate of accidents involving these users is 19.0, when the European average is 12.9. The category “other vehicles” shows how the use of bicycles is a marginal component, but no one must forget this detail, especially in the urban environment where numerous conflict points are generated. For this reason that thesis represents an incentive for urban metamorphosis projected to the systematic decline of private cars that generate congestion, in particular the city of Rome. 2 A protected cycle path can represent that impulse lacking in change, which has forced the majortity of users to use motorized vehicles for short trip in urban environment. Obviously, if roadblocks allow, the continuity of the cycle track must be guaranteed, otherwise promiscuous routes for cyclists and pedestrians will be used; always in compliance with current regulation. The daily use of bicycle allows to combine different aspects. First of all the health-related one: continuous and regular use of the bicycle favors daily exercise. Economic aspect: It reduces the part of family-budget allocated to car, but also the hours lost in traffic, especially city traffic. Ecological: less environmental impact, zero pollution, both atmospheric and acoustic. Political: reduction of energy dependence and saving of non-renewable resources. Mobility: the systematic reduction of motor vehicle makes it easier, in favour of public transport. In this perspective, the benefits of MODAL SPLIT can be fully exploited, resulting from the decrease in the number of cars in circulation. Social: linked to increased autonomy of young and elderly people. Psychic: resulting from the reduction of stress. Therefore, infrastructure plays a significant role, because: conflicts with other road users must be minimized, paths must be both secure and direct as much as possible, as well as improving the quality of the urban environment. This organization is important from International to national and local levels, differentiating tourist purposes and local users puposes. The policies listed above are a guide to create a functional and modern cycling network. However, it must be accompanied by detailed information on the territorial reality where the network is to be implemented. In the following pages, three different realitis will be analyzed: American regulation Italian regulation Spanish regulation Danish regularion 3 CHAPTER 1 "Critical analysys of cycling infrastructures regulations." 4 Here, for different regulation are reported: American, Spanish, Danish and Italian regulation. The first three are carried out as example, in order to provide a starting point for the expansion and evolution of Italian regulation, which has been in place since 1999. AMERICAN REGULATION The average American user uses bicycle the most during leisure time. Its exploitation in the Modal Split model has began to emerge from the second half of the 70's. Nationwide, people are recognizing the energy efficiency, cost effectiveness, health benefits and environmental advantages of bicycling. According to AASHTO Guide for the development of bycicle facilities: “All highways, except those where cyclists are legally prohibited, should be designed and constructed under the assumption that they will be used by cyclists. Therefore, bicycles should be considered in all phases of transportation planning, new roadway design, roadway reconstruction, and capacity improvement and transit projects”. Cyclists require at least 1.0 m (40 inches) of essential operating space based solely on their profile. An operating space of 1.2 m (4 feet) is assumed as the minimum width for any facility designed for exclusive or preferential use by bicyclists. Where traffic parameter are greater, a more comfortable operating space of 1.5 m (5 feet) or more is desirable. A 1994 report by the Federal Highway Administration used the following general categories of bicycle user types (A, B and C) to assist highway designers in determining the impact of different facility types and roadway conditions on bicyclists: Advanced or experienced riders; they are the kind of users that use bike as they would a motor vehicle. They are very confident with road traffic. Basic or less confident adult riders; that kind of user prefers riding bike along neighborhood street, where traffic is few. Sometimes they use bycicle to get work, but primary use is to visinting friends or going to the store. 5 Children; they use bike on their own or with their parents. They use bike to go to school or to reach some recreational center. Designers are involved into realizing new bycicle paths, with protected lanes, which could entice children to move along busier roads. It is also important the facility type, which is choosen by the user according to his degree of confidence. From the point of view of design, the realization of a bycicle facility has to be an ongoing process that should be consistent with a comprehensive plan considering the different bicycle users, existing conditions and community goals. In the following pages are reported the four different type of facilities with explanatory photos: Shared Roadway (No Bikeway Designation). Most bicycle travel in the United States now occurs on streets and highways without bikeway designations. Width is the most critical variable affecting the ability of a roadway to accommodate bicycle traffic. In order for bicycles and motor vehicles to share the use of a roadway without compromising the level of service and safety for either, the facility should provide sufficient paved width to accommodate both modes. I.e, using paved shoulders or increasing lane width. Signed Shared Roadway. Signed shared roadways are designated by bike route signs, and serve either to: a. Provide continuity to other bicycle facilities (usually Bike Lanes); or b. Designate preferred routes through high-demand corridors. Regardless of the type of facility or roadway where they are used, it is recommended that bike route signs include destination information. In urban areas, signs typically would be placed every 500 m (approximately every 1/4 mile), at all turns, and at major signalized intersections. 6 Bike Lane or Bicycle Lane. Bike lanes are established with appropriate pavement markings and signing along streets in corridors where there is significant bicycle demand. They can be incorporated into a roadway when it is desirable to delineate available road space for preferential use by cyclists and motorists and to provide for more predictable movements by each. Bike lane markings, as exemplified in the following picture, can increase a bicyclist’s confidence. Bike lanes should be one-way facilities and carry bike traffic in the same direction as adjacent motor vehicle traffic. Two-way bike lanes on one side of the roadway are not recommended when they result in bicycles riding against the flow of motor vehicle traffic. For roadways with no curb and gutter, the minimum width of a bike lane should be 1.2 m (4 feet). If parking is permitted, the bike lane should be placed between the parking area and the travel lane having a minimum width of 1.5 m (5 feet). Where parking is permitted but a parking stripe or stalls are not utilized, the shared area should be a minimum of 3.3 m (11 feet) without a curb face and 3.6 m (12 feet) adjacent to a curb face . If the parking volume is substantial or turnover is high, an additional 0.3 to 0.6 m (1 to 2 feet) of width is desirable.