Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure Updated 7 May 2020 CONTENTS Summary of Design Principles Legislation regulation and guidelines that for Good Bicycle Infrastructure ..................... 3 should be applied ............................................ 33 Gradient ....................................................................... 3 Infrastructure ignoring bikes? ...........................33 Rider envelope .......................................................... 4 Encouraging active travel (walking and cycling) and using public transport ................33 Design principles for bike riding ....................... 6 Not safe enough? ...................................................34 Coherence .............................................................. 7 Inclusion Fail? ..........................................................35 Directness ............................................................... 7 Ageist? .......................................................................35 Safety ....................................................................... 7 Infrastructure failing bike riders? .....................36 Attractiveness ....................................................... 7 Construction management seems unsafe? ..37 Comfort ................................................................... 7 Risk .........................................................................37 Path Types .................................................................. 8 Traffic Management Plan .............................37 Surface Tolerances and Paint Treatments .....11 Safety ....................................................................38 Bicycle Lane ..............................................................12 Accessibility ........................................................38 What should be provided ...................................13 Amenity ................................................................38 Road crossings (lanterns/marking/signals) .15 Duty of Care .......................................................38 Lighting .......................................................................21 Bibliography.......................................................39 Kerbs and lips ..........................................................22 Path curvature .........................................................23 Markings and signs ................................................24 Hook Turns ...............................................................27 Fences and Railings ..............................................28 Drainage ...................................................................29 Sight lines ................................................................30 Bollards .......................................................................31 Speed control .........................................................32 Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 2 SUMMARY OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES FOR GOOD BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE Austroads, Roads and Maritime Services and NSW Transport have a range of design principles for good bicycle infrastructure. Reviewing bike plans for anyone will be easier as we have developed a range of helpful graphics drawing on, and referencing, these principles Principle Rationale Source Gradient Uphill: for shared paths no more than 5% if a Austroads wheelchair user may use the path AS 1428.1. Guidelines 7.4 For bike only 3% is the maximum desirable gradient and 5% is maximum and should have regular flat intervals of 20m length. Downhill: gradients shouldn’t be more than 5% unless unavoidable and no sharp corners, obstacles or pinch points should be at the bottom due to collision/ crash risk Uphill gradient only Max 5% for shared paths Desirable max 3% with regular 20m flat intervals 20m flat intervals 3% 5% 3% Downhill gradient Should not be more than 5% To minimise collision risk, unless unavoidable NO Sharp corners Obstacles Pinch points at the bottom 5% Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 3 Principle Rationale Source Rider envelope These are the measurements that RTA Bicycle How much space infrastructure is designed to accommodate Guidelines is planned to Bike Path Widths accommodate Shared Path Widths Austroads 7.5.2 riders? Austroads 7.5.3 Austroads 7.5 & 7.6 Rider envelope Operating width of bicyle & rider 1m 1m 0.75m Width of bicyle & rider 0.75m 0.2m Head clearance Height of bicycle & rider 2.2m Eye height of rider 1.4m 0.2 – 0.5m Clearance from walls, 0.125m poles, fences & bollards 0.5m desirable 0.2m minimum Bike Path Widths Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 4 Shared Path Widths Separated Path Widths Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 5 Principle Rationale Source Design principles Design principles for bike riding, Surfaces RTA Bicycle for bike riding (smooth), continuous network, enables Guidelines Coherent, direct, rider to maintain speed (av 20-30km/h, Austroads 6a 4.2 safe, attractive, appropriate sight lines, connectivity comfortable. (coherent network) and has information (directions, signage) See table on following page Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 6 Design Principles for Bicycle Riding Principle Criteria Design considerations Regional routes Local routes Mixed traffic streets Coherence Continuity of routes No breaks in Connect to Easy access to routes regional route local routes Consistent quality of Minimal quality Minimal quality N/A routes and facilities changes changes Easy to follow Regional route Local route All street signs signage signage visible Freedom of choice of Choice of at Choice of at Less than 250m to routes least two least two a route Directness Efficient operating 50km/h design 30km/h design Consistent with speed speed speed street design Delay time 15 sec/km 20 sec/km 20 sec/km Detour factor 20%* 30%* 40%* *Detour factor is the relationship between the most direct distance between origin and destination and the distance taken by the actual route taken. A detour factor of 20% means that the route will be 20% longer than the distance as the crow flies. Safety Minimum risk of Monitor use Monitor use Monitor use accident on route of facility and of facility and of facility and Minimum risk of investigate any investigate any investigate any conflict with car traffic links between links between links between accidents and accidents and accidents and Minimum risk of design. design. design. unsafe infrastructure Attractiveness Support for the Public support Public support N/A system and ownership and ownership Attractiveness of Well lit & open Well lit & open N/A environment appearance appearance Perception of social Minimum reports Minimum N/A safety of vandalism & reports of harassment vandalism & harassment System attractiveness Coordination of Coordination of N/A all supporting all supporting system elements system (maps, fittings, elements (maps, signage etc) fittings, signage etc) Comfort Smoothness of ride Smooth riding Smooth riding Smooth riding (Refer to Austroads - Part 14 surface surface surface Section 8.5) Comfortable gradient Steep climbs Steep climbs N/A minimised minimised Minimise obstruction Minimise illegal Minimise illegal N/A from vehicles parking parking Reduced need to stop 0.5 1.0 1.5 - number of stops (average per km) Protection from Shade trees & Shade trees & N/A adverse climate wind wind Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 7 Principle Rationale Source Path Types Different types of path – RTA bicycle footpath, bike path, shared path, separated guidelines, path Austroads Part 14 S. 6 Separated paths should be used where “… there is a significant volume of both cyclists and pedestrians such that shared use would lead to safety and operational problems”. Commonly used path terms Space for bike path Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 8 Bicycle path Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 9 Shared path Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 10 Principle Rationale Source Surface Tolerances • The surface of a bicycle lane Austroads Part 14 S. 6 4.2.3 and Paint or path should be smooth RMS QA Specification R110 Treatments and straight to avoid causing crashes. Coloured Surface Coatings for Bus Lanes and Cycleways • Surfaces shouldn’t deviate recommends a minimum Skid from a 3m straight edge by Resistance Value of 55 for more than 5mm at any point. normal applications and 65 for • Grooves and lips should be high skid risk applications avoided and tolerances for Australian Standards these are below. (Table 4.1) Safe Environments AS1141.42 • Paths should be wider if they and AS 4663:2013 set the are steeper or promote fast standard for measuring slip travel. resistance • Sprayed, sealed surfaces should use a stone size of <14mm, and conform with frictional properties set in Australian Standard 1141.42 Surface Tolerances Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 11 Principle Rationale Source Bicycle Lane Separated operating space for bicycles on RTA bicycle the road. Extra space should be allocated if guidelines parking is allowed so riders don’t get doored. If marked as a ‘bicycle lane’ with signage, riders have to stay in it unless impractical Summary of Design Principles for Good Bicycle Infrastructure 7 May 2020 12 Principle
Recommended publications
  • Exploring Changes to Cycle Infrastructure to Improve the Experience of Cycling for Families
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UWE Bristol Research Repository Exploring changes to cycle infrastructure to improve the experience of cycling for families Dr William Clayton1 Dr Charles Musselwhite Centre for transport and Society Centre for Innovative Ageing Faculty of Environment and Technology School of Human and Health Sciences University of the West of England Swansea University Bristol, UK Swansea, UK BS16 1QY SA2 8PP Tel: +44 (0)1792 518696 Tel: +44 (0) 117 32 82316 Web: www.drcharliemuss.com Email: [email protected] Twitter: @charliemuss Website: www.uwe.ac.uk/et/research/cts Email: [email protected] KEYWORDS: Cycling, infrastructure, motivation, families, behaviour change. Abstract: Positive changes to the immediate cycling environment can improve the cycling experience through increasing levels of safety, but little is known about how the intrinsic benefits of cycling might be enhanced beyond this. This paper presents research which has studied the potential benefits of changing the infrastructure within a cycle network – here the National Cycle Network (NCN) in the United Kingdom (UK) – to enhance the intrinsic rewards of cycling. The rationale in this approach is that this could be a motivating factor in encouraging greater use of the cycle network, and consequently help in promoting cycling and active travel more generally amongst family groups. The project involved in-depth research with 64 participants, which included family interviews, self-documented family cycle rides, and school focus groups. The findings suggest that improvements to the cycling environment can help maintain ongoing motivation for experienced cycling families by enhancing novel aspects of a routine journey, creating enjoyable activities and facilitating other incidental experiences along the course of a route, and improving the kinaesthetic experience of cycling.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances
    Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances November 2011 i iv . Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances November 2011 i The Delaware Valley Regional Planning The symbol in our logo is Commission is dedicated to uniting the adapted from region’s elected officials, planning the official professionals, and the public with a DVRPC seal and is designed as a common vision of making a great region stylized image of the Delaware Valley. even greater. Shaping the way we live, The outer ring symbolizes the region as a whole while the diagonal bar signifies the work, and play, DVRPC builds Delaware River. The two adjoining consensus on improving transportation, crescents represent the Commonwealth promoting smart growth, protecting the of Pennsylvania and the State of environment, and enhancing the New Jersey. economy. We serve a diverse region of DVRPC is funded by a variety of funding nine counties: Bucks, Chester, Delaware, sources including federal grants from the Montgomery, and Philadelphia in U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Gloucester, and Mercer in New Jersey. and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Pennsylvania and New Jersey DVRPC is the federally designated departments of transportation, as well Metropolitan Planning Organization for as by DVRPC’s state and local member the Greater Philadelphia Region — governments. The authors, however, are leading the way to a better future. solely responsible for the findings and conclusions herein, which may not represent the official views or policies of the funding agencies. DVRPC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Highway 17 and 69 Controlled Access Highway Response
    Sudbury Cyclists Union March 28, 2014 Re: Route Planning Study, Highway 17 from Sudbury to Markstay and Highway 69 from the Estaire Road Interchange to Highway 17 The Sudbury Cyclists Union (SCU) has serious concerns about how the implementation of controlled access highways have affected cyclists in the Sudbury region. We also have some specific concerns about the implementation of this project as it relates to the safety of cyclists. The intent of all provincial roadwork is to improve the safety of its users. Traditionally, the focus has been on the safety of motorized traffic. The safety of pedestrians and cyclists has been long neglected on our highways. On page 2.1 of your “Study Design Report”, you note that to “promote a multimodal transportation network” is a key provincial responsibility” as is to “be a leader in road safety”. The sole intent of implementing controlled access highways is to facilitate the safe movement of motorized traffic. While implementing such highways draws dangerous traffic away from more local routes that are used by cyclists, alternative safe and convenient routes for cyclists are often an afterthought and are not an integral part of the planning process. An example is the Highway 69 corridor leading south from the City of Greater Sudbury that has been built without guaranteeing an alternative right of way for cyclists wishing to travel south. This controlled access highway has closed off access for non-motorized users to several towns and tourist areas, including the town of Killarney and the iconic Killarney Provincial Park. In other provinces, in particular in Western Canada, major motor routes similar to our controlled highways have paved shoulders that are used by cyclists.
    [Show full text]
  • Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team
    Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team Project Leads: Nancy Smith Lea, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Ray Tomalty, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Researchers: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Marvin Macaraig, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Julia Malmo-Laycock, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Report Design: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Cover Photo: Tour de l’ile, Go Bike Montreal Festival, Montreal by Maxime Juneau/APMJ Project Partner: Please cite as: Benni, J., Macaraig, M., Malmo-Laycock, J., Smith Lea, N. & Tomalty, R. (2019). Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership. CONTENTS List of Figures 4 List of Tables 7 Executive Summary 8 1. Introduction 12 2. Costs of Bicycle Infrastructure Measures 13 Introduction 14 On-street facilities 16 Intersection & crossing treatments 26 Traffic calming treatments 32 Off-street facilities 39 Accessory & support features 43 3. Costs of Cycling Programs 51 Introduction 52 Training programs 54 Repair & maintenance 58 Events 60 Supports & programs 63 Conclusion 71 References 72 Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada 3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Bollard protected cycle track on Bloor Street, Toronto, ON ..................................................... 16 Figure 2: Adjustable concrete barrier protected cycle track on Sherbrook St, Winnipeg, ON ............ 17 Figure 3: Concrete median protected cycle track on Pandora Ave in Victoria, BC ............................ 18 Figure 4: Pandora Avenue Protected Bicycle Lane Facility Map ............................................................ 19 Figure 5: Floating Bus Stop on Pandora Avenue ........................................................................................ 19 Figure 6: Raised pedestrian crossings on Pandora Avenue .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: an Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 8-2018 Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: An Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah Stephanie A. Tomlin Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Environmental Design Commons, and the Landscape Architecture Commons Recommended Citation Tomlin, Stephanie A., "Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: An Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah" (2018). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 7195. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/7195 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PLANNING FOR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES: AN ALTERNATIVE FUTURE FOR CACHE VALLEY, UTAH by Stephanie A. Tomlin A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Bioregional Planning Approved: Bartlett Warren-Kretzschmar, Ph.D. Richard Toth, M.L.A. Major Professor Committee Member Jordy Guth, M.S. Mark R. McLellan, Ph.D. Committee Member Vice President for Research and Dean of the School of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2018 ii Copyright © Stephanie A. Tomlin, 2018 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Planning for Active Transportation in the Western United States: An Alternative Future for Cache Valley, Utah by Stephanie A. Tomlin, Master of Bioregional Planning Utah State University, 2018 Major Professor: Bartlett (Barty) Warren-Kretzschmar, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • A Feasibility Study of GIS-Based Analyses of Cycling Infrastructure
    Build it: A Feasibility Study of GIS-Based Analyses of Cycling Infrastructure A thesis submitted by Ian Thistle In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning Tufts University February 2016 Adviser: Mary Davis Reader: Barbara Parmenter Table of Contents List of Figures ...................................................................................... iv List of Tables ........................................................................................ v Abstract .................................................................................................. vi Acknowledgements ................................................................................. vii Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................ 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review.................................................................... 4 Benefits of Cycling ................................................................................ 4 How can cities influence mode choice towards biking? ......................... 6 Evaluating Road Infrastructure for Cycling ............................................ 9 Analysis of Street Networks: “Build it! But Where?” ............................ 13 Chapter 3: Methods ............................................................................... 17 Step 1: Selecting the comparison methodologies ............................... 19 Step 2: Selecting the sample .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Choices for Cities: Cycling in the City
    Smart choices for cities Cycling in the City Smart choices for cities Cycling in the City Pictures © Shutterstock, 2016, pages: 1, 14, 15, 20, 22. 2 Smart choices for cities Cycling in the City Table of contents Preface. 4 Introduction . 5 The city is changing . 5 Why cycling? . 8 An integrated approach to cycling provision in the urban environment. 9 Infrastructure.and.equipment. 10 Introduction. 10 Cycling safety . 10 Where do most accidents happen? . 11 Senior cyclists and safety . 12 Equipment . 12 Implications for infrastructure . 12 Building blocks for safe infrastructure . 14 Recognisability . 16 Specific infrastructural situations . 16 Multi-modal Transport. 16 Bicycle Congestion . 18 Bicycle Theft . 18 Supporting.Actions. 19 Introduction. 19 Building an organization in (local) government . 19 Working with stakeholders . 20 Cycling Association . 20 Employers: Bicycle to work . 20 Cycle Marketing . 20 Education . 21 Insights in cycling behaviour . 21 Gathering data . 21 Cycling in traffic models . 21 From.ideas.to.policy:.Recommendations.for.approaching.investments.in.cycling . 22 Bibliography. 24 Notes. 26 3 Smart choices for cities Cycling in the City Preface Thank you for reading the eighth and final policy analysis of Over 70% of all Europeans live in cities and cities are the CIVITAS WIKI Policy Analysis Series. becoming increasingly congested. Citizens suffer from poor air quality and noise, which makes the cities less liveable. The mission of the CIVITAS WIKI project was to provide This document provides information about measures that can information on clean urban transport and the CIVITAS be taken in order to increase the use of cycling as a transport Initiative to EU city planners, decision-makers and citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • FLOW Portfolio of Measures: the Role of Walking and Cycling in Reducing
    THE ROLE OF WALKING AND CYCLING IN REDUCING CONGESTION A PORTFOLIO OF MEASURES A PORTFOLIO OF MEASURES FLOW DOCUMENT TITLE The Role of Walking and Cycling in Reducing Congestion: A Portfolio of Measures AUTHORS Thorsten Koska, Frederic Rudolph (Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie gGmbH); Case Studies: Benjamin Schreck, Andreas Vesper (Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen), Tamás Halmos (Budapesti Közlekedési Központ), Tamás Mátrai (Budapesti Műszaki és Gazdaságtudományi Egyetem), Alicja Pawłowska (Municipality of Gdynia), Jacek Oskarbski (Politechnika Gdanska), Benedicte Swennen (European Cyclists’ Federation), Nora Szabo (PTV AG), Graham Cavanagh (Rupprecht Consult GmbH), Florence Lepoudre (Traject), Katie Millard (Transport Research Laboratory), Martin Wedderburn (Walk21), Miriam Müller, David Knor (Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie gGmbH) CONTACT Project coordinator: Rupprecht Consult Bernard Gyergyay: [email protected] Kristin Tovaas: [email protected] Project dissemination manager: Polis Daniela Stoycheva: [email protected] CITATION FLOW Project (2016). The Role of Walking and Cycling in Reducing Congestion: A Portfolio of Measures. Brussels. Available at http://www.h2020-flow.eu. IMAGE DISCLAIMER The images in this document are used as a form of visual citation to support and clarify statements made in the text. The authors have made great effort to provide credit for every image used. If, despite our efforts, we have not given sufficient credit to the author of any images used, please contact us directly at [email protected] LAYOUT PEAK Sourcing DATE July 2016 The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. Neither the INEA nor the European Commission is responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimum Grid Primer
    MINIMUM GRID PRIMER What is a minimum grid? A minimum grid is a connected network of cycling infrastructure that allows people to reach their destinations safely, conveniently and comfortably by bike. The intent of a minimum grid is to make cycling a viable mode of transportation for citizens of all ages. Employees can bike to work. People can bike to shop, attend appointments, visit friends and family, or to have fun. Kids can bike to school, to soccer practice, to the park, to grandma’s house or to visit a friend. Being able to cycle around a city safely improves quality of life for everyone. What would a minimum grid look like in Greater Sudbury? - Safe cycling infrastructure on our primary corridors. Because of safety concerns and their role as main travel routes, providing safe cycling on arterials and collectors is a priority, and will have the biggest impact. - Communities, neighbourhoods and main destinations connected with safe cycling infrastructure so that cycling is a safe and viable transportation option for residents. - Cycling routes that are complete, continuous, and connected. The Sustainable Mobility Advisory Panel has identified a minimum grid of cycling routes that will connect communities, neighbourhoods, and major destinations in Greater Sudbury. Why is it important to have safe cycling on our busiest streets first? A transportation network relies on primary routes that secondary routes feed into and out of. This is true of any type of transportation, including cycling. The primary network needs to be constructed first, otherwise the transportation network is fragmented - the secondary routes do not connect to anything.
    [Show full text]
  • Cycling Infrastructure Version 1
    Cycling VERSION 1 infrastructure Cycling infrastructure In this chapter 01 Introduction 5 Kerbside activity 33 07 02 Choosing the right facility 6 General Design 35 08 2.1 Design parameters 6 8.1 Design controls 35 2.2 Types of cycle facility 8 8.2 Horizontal and vertical alignment 39 8.3 Widths and clearances 41 03 Approved facilities within the road reserve 11 8.4 Construction 45 3.1 Separated cycleway (busy, fast, or heavy traffic) 11 8.5 Drainage 46 3.2 Separated cycleway (low volume and slow traffic) 14 8.6 Signs and markings 47 3.3 Alternatives requiring specific approval 15 8.7 Lighting 48 3.4 Mixed traffic streets 16 3.5 Cycle streets 16 Ancillary features 49 09 3.6 Pedestrian priority areas (cycling and pedestrians) 17 3.7 Interim facilities 20 Design for maintenance 52 10 Appendix A 04 Other infrastructure 22 Cycle parking 53 4.1 Buffered cycle lanes 22 A.1 Introduction 53 4.2 Cycle lanes 23 A.2 Bicycle Parking General principles 54 4.3 Cycle lanes between other traffic lanes 23 A.3 Categories of bicycle parking 56 4.4 Shared paths 24 A.4 Types of bicycle parking 58 A.5 Types of bicycle stands 64 05 Off road cycle paths 25 A.6 Bicycle parking placement 67 A.7 Bicycle parking access 68 06 Intersections 26 A.8 Bicycle stand materials 68 6.1 Cycleway intersections 27 A.9 Signage and wayfinding for bicycle parking 68 6.2 Roundabouts 27 A.10 Bicycle parking demand 69 6.3 Signalised intersections 28 A.11 Bicycle parking at public transport terminals 70 6.4 Unsignalised intersections 30 A.12 Bicycle parking provisioning process 71 6.5 Midblock crossing 31 A.13 Building and installation 72 6.6 Vehicle crossings 32 A.14 Operation and maintenance 72 5794_20.04.21 2 TDM | ENGINEERING DESIGN CODE 3 Cycling infrastructure 01 Introduction PURPOSE Cycling infrastructure includes facilities that are dedicated for cycle use, as well as specific standards for general infrastructure to meet the needs of cycle users.
    [Show full text]
  • LCDS Chapter 6 Signs and Markings
    London Cycling Design Standards [Chapter 6] Signs and markings | Contents 6. Signs and markings This chapter gives an overview of requirements on signing 6.2 Surface markings 06 to support cycling, both for dedicated infrastructure and 6.2.1 General requirements 06 for cyclists’ general use of the highway. 6.2.2 Lane markings 06 6.2.3 Give way markings 08 6.1 Signing requirements 01 6.2.4 Other markings for cycle tracks 09 6 .1.1 Signing principles 01 6.2.5 Cycle symbols and direction signing 10 6.1.2 Applying the principles 01 6.2.6 Coloured surfacing 13 6.1.3 Regulatory changes 02 6.1.4 Signs requiring enforcement 03 6.3 Signs 14 6.1.5 Signing to support wayfinding 04 6.3.1 Direction signs 14 6.3.2 Off-highway direction signs 16 6.3.3 Warning signs 16 6.3.4 Signs for pedestrian zones 17 6.3.5 Signs to minimise or avoid 18 6.3.6 Minimising sign clutter 18 6.3.7 Sign installation and mounting 21 6.4 Schedule of signs 23 Bibliography 29 Version control Version 1 (Dec 2014) – Published Q12 Version 2 (Sept 2016) – Amendments throughout following publication of TSRGD (2016) London Cycling Design Standards [Chapter 6] Signing requirements 01 Signing plays an important role in supporting and Figure 6.1 Key signing considerations in CLoS 6.1 Signing requirements enforcing safer, more comfortable, legible and coherent cycling infrastructure. Road signs and Factor Indicator Relates in this markings are defined, together, as ‘traffic signs’ chapter to 6.1.1 Signing principles within the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.
    [Show full text]
  • Arrive in Copenhagen Upon Arrival at the Copenhagen Airport, Claim Your Luggage and Clear Customs
    VBT Itinerary by VBT www.vbt.com Scandinavia: Denmark & Sweden Bike Vacation + Air Package Indulge in two of Europe’s most bike-friendly countries – VBT style! Crisp sea air, breathtaking coastal vistas along flat cycling paths and deeply held Scandinavian traditions make this Sweden and Denmark bike tour impossible to resist. Begin and end your seaside sojourn in Copenhagen, and set out on invigorating rides that deliver you to Hamlet’s front door at Elsinore castle … to sandy beaches, forests, and meadows along the Kattegattleden, one of Europe’s most heralded cycling routes … to charming villages steeped in history … and to one of Europe’s most stunning gardens. Along the way, immerse yourself in Scandinavian culture when you partake in a fika (coffee break), tap your feet to folk music and savor an authentic smörgåsbord buffet presented by a local chef. Cultural Highlights Discover the bike-friendly culture of two of Scandinavia’s most fascinating countries: Denmark 1 / 9 VBT Itinerary by VBT www.vbt.com and Sweden. Enjoy magnificent sea views on easy coastal routes, including the Kattegattleden bike path, Europe’s Cycle Route of the Year 2018. Explore Hamlet’s moody castle of Elsinore on a guided tour, then ferry across the narrow Öresund to Sweden. Savor a smörgåsbord dinner catered by a local chef and seasoned with insights into Sweden’s most famous style of dining. What to Expect This tour offers a combination of easy terrain and moderate hills and is ideal for beginning and experienced cyclists. Our VBT support vehicle is always available for those who would like assistance with the hills.
    [Show full text]