DOCSLIB.ORG

URBAN CYCLING DESIGN GUIDELINES (UCDG) Index

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
URBAN CYCLING DESIGN GUIDELINES (UCDG) Index DECEMBER, 2017 URBAN CYCLING DESIGN GUIDELINES (UCDG) Index 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 5 2. Cycling-inclusive planning and design ............................................................................................... 6 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 6 2.2 Demotorization of the core city .................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Restrictive parking policies ........................................................................................................... 8 2.4 Dismantling multi-lane one-way roads ......................................................................................... 9 2.5 Flyovers ....................................................................................................................................... 12 2.5.1 Why not to apply flyovers ................................................................................................... 12 2.5.2 Approach at existing flyovers .............................................................................................. 13 2.5.3 Approach at new flyovers ................................................................................................... 16 3. Main requirements for cycling-infrastructure planning and design ............................................... 17 3.1 Introduction and characteristics of cyclists ................................................................................ 17 3.2 Coherence ................................................................................................................................... 17 3.2.1 Coherence at network level ................................................................................................ 17 3.2.3 Coherence at road section level ......................................................................................... 17 3.2.4 Coherence at intersection level .......................................................................................... 18 3.3 Directness.................................................................................................................................... 18 3.4 Road Safety ................................................................................................................................. 19 3.4.1 Road safety at network level: ............................................................................................. 19 3.4.2 Road safety at road section level ........................................................................................ 20 3.4.3 Road safety at intersections level ....................................................................................... 21 3.4.4 Road safety at road surface level ........................................................................................ 22 3.5 Comfort ....................................................................................................................................... 22 3.6 Attractiveness ............................................................................................................................. 23 3.6.1 Attractiveness at network level .......................................................................................... 23 3.6.2 Attractiveness at road section level .................................................................................... 25 3.6.3 Attractiveness at road surface level .................................................................................... 25 4. Principles of cycling infrastructure at road sections ....................................................................... 26 4.1 Three types of cycling infrastructure .......................................................................................... 26 4.2 Cycle Tracks ................................................................................................................................. 26 2 4.2.1 Raised cycle tracks .............................................................................................................. 26 4.2.2 Raised adjacent cycle tracks ............................................................................................... 28 4.2.3 Road level cycle tracks ........................................................................................................ 29 4.2.4 Cyclists and pedestrians ...................................................................................................... 29 4.2.5 Verge / Multi Utility Zone ................................................................................................... 30 4.2.6 Two-way cycle tracks .......................................................................................................... 32 4.2.7 Width of cycle tracks ........................................................................................................... 33 4.3 Cycle lanes ................................................................................................................................... 35 4.4 Shared use ................................................................................................................................... 38 5. Cycling infrastructure in relation to street typology ....................................................................... 39 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 39 5.2 Pune Street typology ....................................................................................................................... 39 5.3 Traffic lane widths ........................................................................................................................... 40 5.4 Cycle tracks at road sections of arterial roads ................................................................................ 41 5.5 Cycle tracks at road sections of sub-arterial roads ......................................................................... 43 5.6 Cycling infrastructure at road sections of collector roads .............................................................. 47 5.6.1 Wide collector roads: 21-25 m. right of way .............................................................................. 48 5.6.2 Collector road 18 - 22 m. with parking ....................................................................................... 49 5.6.3 Collector road with segregated cycle tracks (15-18 m.) without parking ................................... 50 5.6.4 Collector road with raised adjacent cycle tracks (14-18 m.) without parking ............................ 51 5.6.5 Collector road with cycle lanes (13-18 m.) without parking ....................................................... 53 5.7 Cycling infrastructure at road sections of local access roads ......................................................... 54 5.8 Pinch point design ........................................................................................................................... 57 6. Cycling infrastructure at intersections ............................................................................................ 58 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 58 6.2 Design of side roads and property entrances ................................................................................. 59 6.2.1 Elevated crossings at side roads with cycle tracks .............................................................. 59 6.2.2 Bending out of cycle tracks at side roads............................................................................ 61 6.2.3 Side roads with two-way cycle tracks ................................................................................. 62 6.3 Intersections with cycle tracks ........................................................................................................ 63 6.3.1 Intersections with one-way cycle tracks and segregated design ........................................ 64 6.3.2 Intersections with two-way cycle tracks with segregated design ...................................... 66 3 6.3.3 Cycle tracks with unsegregated design at intersections ..................................................... 67 6.3.4 Comparing segregated and unsegregated designs at intersections ........................................... 70 7. Special topics and design details..................................................................................................... 71 7.1 Vertical design details and ramps ............................................................................................... 71 7.2 Bus stops ..................................................................................................................................... 71 7.3 Material use, road surface and colour ........................................................................................ 77 7.4 Bollards ....................................................................................................................................... 78 8. Key success factors for cycling infrastructure design and implementation ................................... 79 4 1. Introduction
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roundabout Planning, Design, and Operations Manual
    Roundabout Planning, Design, and Operations Manual December 2015 Alabama Department of Transportation ROUNDABOUT PLANNING, DESIGN, AND OPERATIONS MANUAL December 2015 Prepared by: The University Transportation Center for of Alabama Steven L. Jones, Ph.D. Abdulai Abdul Majeed Steering Committee Tim Barnett, P.E., ALDOT Office of Safety Operations Stuart Manson, P.E., ALDOT Office of Safety Operations Sonya Baker, ALDOT Office of Safety Operations Stacey Glass, P.E., ALDOT Maintenance Stan Biddick, ALDOT Design Bryan Fair, ALDOT Planning Steve Walker, P.E., ALDOT R.O.W. Vince Calametti, P.E., ALDOT 9th Division James Brown, P.E., ALDOT 2nd Division James Foster, P.E., Mobile County Clint Andrews, Federal Highway Administration Blair Perry, P.E., Gresham Smith & Partners Howard McCulloch, P.E., NE Roundabouts DISCLAIMER This manual provides guidelines and recommended practices for planning and designing roundabouts in the State of Alabama. This manual cannot address or anticipate all possible field conditions that will affect a roundabout design. It remains the ultimate responsibility of the design engineer to ensure that a design is appropriate for prevailing traffic and field conditions. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1.1. Purpose ...................................................................................................... 1-5 1.2. Scope and Organization ............................................................................... 1-7 1.3. Limitations ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Continuous Flow Intersection, Parallel Flow Intersection, and Upstream Signalized Crossover
    Comparison of Three Unconventional Arterial Intersection Designs: Continuous Flow Intersection, Parallel Flow Intersection, and Upstream Signalized Crossover Seonyeong Cheong, Saed Rahwanji, and Gang-Len Chang Abstract— This research is aimed to evaluate and world have adopted many conventional measures, including compare the operational performance of three signal planning and double left-turn lanes, for alleviating this unconventional intersections: Continuous Flow problem [1]. The using of these conventional measures are Intersection (CFI), Parallel Flow Intersection (PFI) and limited as the modifications of intersection design, such as Upstream Signalized Crossover (USC). For this purpose, widening interchanges and building bypasses, are expensive various experimental designs, including traffic conditions, and disruptive [1]. In contrast, the unconventional arterial geometric features and signal plans, were set and the intersection design (UAID) is one of the methods that can average delays were compared for movements of efficiently reduce the congestion with less cost as compare through-only traffic and left-turn-only traffic. From the with the conventional measures. General principles of results of analysis, all three unconventional intersections operation and management strategies of the UAID include: 1) outperformed conventional one and among the emphasis on through traffic movements along the arterial; 2) unconventional intersections, CFI outperformed the reduction in the number of signal phases (e.g. left-turn arrow others except for some traffic conditions. In the balanced phase); and 3) reduction in the number of intersection conflict traffic condition scenario, at the low traffic volume level, points [2]. These principles allow the UAID to reduce the the average delays of through traffic for PFI were smaller traffic congestion at the intersection and improve the traffic than that of CFI and very similar at the moderate traffic safety.
    [Show full text]
  • FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide
    BIKEWAY SELECTION GUIDE FEBRUARY 2019 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED February 2019 Final Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. FUNDING NUMBERS Bikeway Selection Guide NA 6. AUTHORS 5b. CONTRACT NUMBER Schultheiss, Bill; Goodman, Dan; Blackburn, Lauren; DTFH61-16-D-00005 Wood, Adam; Reed, Dan; Elbech, Mary 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION VHB, 940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500 REPORT NUMBER Raleigh, NC 27606 NA Toole Design Group, 8484 Georgia Avenue, Suite 800 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Mobycon - North America, Durham, NC 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AND ADDRESS(ES) AGENCY REPORT NUMBER Tamara Redmon FHWA-SA-18-077 Project Manager, Office of Safety Federal Highway Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington DC 20590 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE This document is available to the public on the FHWA website at: NA https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike 13. ABSTRACT This document is a resource to help transportation practitioners consider and make informed decisions about trade- offs relating to the selection of bikeway types. This report highlights linkages between the bikeway selection process and the transportation planning process. This guide presents these factors and considerations in a practical process- oriented way. It draws on research where available and emphasizes engineering judgment, design flexibility, documentation, and experimentation. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES Bike, bicycle, bikeway, multimodal, networks, 52 active transportation, low stress networks 16. PRICE CODE NA 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20.
    [Show full text]
  • Maricopa County Department of Transportation MAJOR STREETS and ROUTES PLAN Policy Document and Street Classification Atlas
    Maricopa County Department of Transportation MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES PLAN Policy Document and Street Classification Atlas Adopted April 18, 2001 Revised September 2004 Revised June 2011 Preface to 2011 Revision This version of the Major Streets and Routes Plan (MSRP) revises the original plan and the 2004 revisions. Looking ahead to pending updates to the classification systems of towns and cities in Maricopa County, the original MSRP stipulated a periodic review and modification of the street functional classification portion of the plan. This revision incorporates the following changes: (1) as anticipated, many of the communities in the County have updated either their general or transportation plans in the time since the adoption of the first MSRP; (2) a new roadway classification, the Arizona Parkway, has been added to the Maricopa County street classification system and the expressway classification has been removed; and (3) a series of regional framework studies have been conducted by the Maricopa Association of Governments to establish comprehensive roadway networks in parts of the West Valley. Table of Contents 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................1 2. Functional Classification Categorization.............................................................................1 3. Geometric Design Standards..............................................................................................4 4. Street Classification Atlas..................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Planning and Design Guideline for Cycle Infrastructure
    Planning and Design Guideline for Cycle Infrastructure Planning and Design Guideline for Cycle Infrastructure Cover Photo: Rajendra Ravi, Institute for Democracy & Sustainability. Acknowledgements This Planning and Design guideline has been produced as part of the Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation (SSEF) sponsored project on Non-motorised Transport by the Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme at the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. The project team at TRIPP, IIT Delhi, has worked closely with researchers from Innovative Transport Solutions (iTrans) Pvt. Ltd. and SGArchitects during the course of this project. We are thankful to all our project partners for detailed discussions on planning and design issues involving non-motorised transport: The Manual for Cycling Inclusive Urban Infrastructure Design in the Indian Subcontinent’ (2009) supported by Interface for Cycling Embassy under Bicycle Partnership Program which was funded by Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia. The second document is Public Transport Accessibility Toolkit (2012) and the third one is the Urban Road Safety Audit (URSA) Toolkit supported by Institute of Urban Transport (IUT) provided the necessary background information for this document. We are thankful to Prof. Madhav Badami, Tom Godefrooij, Prof. Talat Munshi, Rajinder Ravi, Pradeep Sachdeva, Prasanna Desai, Ranjit Gadgil, Parth Shah and Dr. Girish Agrawal for reviewing an earlier version of this document and providing valuable comments. We thank all our colleagues at the Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme for cooperation provided during the course of this study. Finally we would like to thank the transport team at Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation (SSEF) for providing the necessary support required for the completion of this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Mixed Traffic Flow Behavior on Arterial Road
    Special Issue - 2018 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) ISSN: 2278-0181 RTCEC - 2018 Conference Proceedings Study on Mixed Traffic Flow Behavior on Arterial Road Lilesh Gautama Jinendra Kumar Jainb a Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, b Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, MNIT Jaipur, Rajasthan, India MNIT Jaipur, Rajasthan, India Abstract- Arterials in metropolitan cities are expected to dynamics using macroscopic functions (such as a speed- provide flexibility to the high volume of traffic. A realistic density relationship). understanding of traffic flow behaviour for such essential urban roads is necessary for traffic operation planning and The relationships among traffic flow characteristics (flow management for ensuring the desired level of service. Metro (q), speed (v), and density (k)) are typically represented politan cities in India carry different types of vehicles with different static and dynamic characteristics with a majority of graphically and referred to as fundamental diagram. The two wheelers. In the present study, the traffic characterization fundamental diagram plays an effective role in traffic flow on a dynamic scale is carried out by considering two-wheeler theory and transportation engineering [3,4]. Among the and car as reference vehicles. Speed, flow, density relationships three pair-wise‟ relationships” (e.g., speed-density, flow- are developed. density, and speed-flow), the speed-density relationship appears to be fundamental. Some of the popular The present case study is an examination of the behaviour of macroscopic models are Green shield's Model, Greenberg’s mixed traffic flow speed and flow rate on an access controlled Model, Drake Model, Underwood Model, Pipe's generalized in six-lane divided Jaipur city in Rajasthan state of India.
    [Show full text]
  • Arterial Road
    Glossary of Terms Arterial Road – a high capacity urban road. The primary function of an arterial Improvement Alternative – a transportation alternative that addresses the road is to deliver tra!c from collector and local roads to freeways. needs along the I-70 corridor. These alternatives include roadway improvements, wider shoulders, interchange con#guration improvements, Auxiliary Lane – an extra lane constructed between on and o" ramps interchange consolidations, etc. which allows drivers a safe way to merge into tra!c while also preventing bottlenecks caused by drivers attempting to enter or exit the freeway. Interchange Spacing – the distance between two grade-separated interchanges. Guidelines call for having them at least one mile apart within Bottleneck – section of road that experiences congestion at a speci#c point; urban areas. it can be caused by curves, reduced number of lanes, merging tra!c, or areas where the number of vehicles exceeds the capacity of the roadway. Kansas City Scout – a system used to monitor and respond to tra!c incidents and provide roadway information to motorists in the metropolitan area. This is primarily done with changeable message boards that provide real-time information to the motorists along major facilities. Congestion along I-70 at the Jackson Curve Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) – a document required by NEPA for certain actions “signi#cantly a"ecting the quality of the human environment” that describes the positive and negative impacts of a proposed action. First Tier EIS – covered a large corridor area and addressed overall corridor strategies that was divided into subsequent Second Tier environmental studies. The limits of this First Tier EIS were approximately Changable Message Board 18 miles along I-70 just east of the Future of I-70 of Future Missouri/Kansas state line to east of Lane Balance – number of through lanes at an exit ramp is equal to the the I-470 interchange.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Arterial Road Optimization and Design Combined with HOV Carpooling Under Connected Vehicle Environment
    Hindawi Journal of Advanced Transportation Volume 2019, Article ID 6895239, 11 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6895239 Research Article Urban Arterial Road Optimization and Design Combined with HOV Carpooling under Connected Vehicle Environment Lina Mao ,1 Wenquan Li ,1 Pengsen Hu,1 Guiliang Zhou ,2,3 Huiting Zhang,2 and Xuanyu Zhou2 1School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China 2Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Trac and Transportation Security, Huaiyin Institute of Technology, Huaian 223003, China 3School of Automotive and Trac Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China Correspondence should be addressed to Wenquan Li; [email protected] and Guiliang Zhou; [email protected] Received 3 February 2019; Accepted 16 August 2019; Published 19 December 2019 Academic Editor: Jose E. Naranjo Copyright © 2019 Lina Mao et al. is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. e HOV carpooling lane oers a feasible approach to alleviate trac congestion. e connected vehicle environment is able to provide accurate trac data, which could optimize the design of HOV carpooling schemes. In this paper, signicant tidal trac ow phenomenon with severe trac congestion was identied on North Beijing road (bidirectional four‐lane) and South Huaihai road (bidirectional six‐lane) in Huai’an, Jiangsu Province. e historical trac data of the road segments were collected through the connected vehicle environment facilities. e purpose of this study is to investigate the eect of adopting two HOV schemes (regular HOV scheme and reversible HOV carpooling scheme) on the urban arterial road under connected vehicle environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Iii Roads and Streets Chapter Contents
    CHAPTER III ROADS AND STREETS TOC-III-3 of 3 CHAPTER III ROADS AND STREETS CHAPTER CONTENTS Page No.I...........................................................................................................GENERAL 1 A. Introduction............................................................................................................1 B. Definitions .............................................................................................................1 C. Authorization, Permits ...........................................................................................3 D. Abbreviations.........................................................................................................4 II. DESIGN CRITERIA .......................................................................................................4 A. Pre-Design Meeting ...............................................................................................4 B. Preliminary Considerations....................................................................................4 1. Factors to be Considered in Trafficway Design ........................................4 2. Survey Requirements.................................................................................5 3. Right-of-Way Requirements......................................................................6 4. General Development Plan ........................................................................7 5. Preliminary Studies....................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Vicroads Access Management Policies May 2006 Version 1.02 2 Vicroads Access Management Policies May 2006 Ver 1.02
    1 VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Ver 1.02 VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Version 1.02 2 VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Ver 1.02 FOREWORD FOR ACCESS MANAGEMENT The safe and efficient movement of people and goods plays a key role in the future sustainability of Victoria. The emphasis on using the road network more effectively and efficiently has grown significantly over recent years. With this, the need to manage our existing road space more effectively will be of paramount importance. Access management is a key component to achieving this goal. Access management focuses on ensuring the safety and efficiency of the road network, by providing appropriate access to adjoining properties. This requires a systematic approach to facilitate logical and consistent decision making. This VicRoads Access Management Policies sets out the legislative and practical mechanisms to assist in achieving the above objectives. DAVID ANDERSON CHIEF EXECUTIVE 3 VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Ver 1.02 Table of Contents FORWARD FOR ACCESS MANAGEMENT.............................................................1 PART 1: INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................4 PART 2: USING THE MODEL POLICIES FOR MANAGING VEHICLE ACCESS TO CONTROLLED ACCESS ROADS........................................................................5 2.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................5 2.1.1
    [Show full text]
  • High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes - an Overall Evaluation Including Brisbane Case Studies
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Queensland University of Technology ePrints Archive Copyright 2005 Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. First published in: Bauer, Joshua and McKellar, Cameron and Bunker, Jonathan M and Wikman, John (2005) High occupancy vehicle lanes - an overall evaluation including Brisbane case studies. In Douglas, Jon, Eds. Proceedings 2005 AITPM National Conference, pages pp. 229-244, Brisbane. High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes – An Overall Evaluation Including Brisbane Case Studies JOSHUA BAUER Civil Engineer GHD [email protected] CAMERON MCKELLAR Civil Engineer Maunsell Australia [email protected] DR JONATHAN BUNKER Lecturer (Transport Engineering and Planning) School of Urban Development, Queensland University of Technology [email protected] JOHN WIKMAN Executive Manager Traffic & Safety Department RACQ [email protected] KEYWORDS: HOV, Evaluation Framework, Measures of Effectiveness, Case Studies, Transit Lane. ABSTRACT High occupancy vehicle (HOV) or transit lanes are seen as an option to increase person carrying capacity and improve travel times for users along congested road corridors. Over the years RACQ has questioned the effectiveness of HOV lanes, especially in cases where a general purpose lane has been reallocated as a HOV lane. In 2004, the Club awarded a scholarship to two QUT students to conduct their thesis on gaining a better understanding of HOV lanes. The project covered a literature review of effectiveness measures for HOV lanes and field research analysing two road corridors in Brisbane - Waterworks Road and Lutwyche Road containing a T2 lane and T3 lane respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Intersection Design Practices -- Final
    Kentucky Transportation Center Research Report KTC -10-09/SPR 380-09-1F Improving Intersection Design Practices FINAL REPORT – PHASE I Our Mission We provide services to the transportation community through research, technology transfer and education. We create and participate in partnerships to promote safe and effective transportation systems. © 2012 University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center Information may not be used, reproduced, or republished without our written consent. Kentucky Transportation Center 176 Oliver H. Raymond Building Lexington, KY 40506-0281 (859) 257-5028 fax (859) 257-1815 www.ktc.uky.edu Research Report KTC-10-09 / SPR-380-09-1F IMPROVING INTERSECTION DESIGN PRACTICES Final Report – Phase I by Nikiforos Stamatiadis Professor and Adam Kirk Research Engineer Department of Civil Engineering and Kentucky Transportation Center College of Engineering University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of policies of the University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The inclusion of manufacture names and trade names is for identification purposes and is not to be considered an endorsement. June 2010 1. Report Number 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. KTC-10-09 / SPR-380-09-1F 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date June 2010 Improving Intersection Design Practices 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. N. Stamatiadis and A.
    [Show full text]