Cycle facilities’ standards

Published by Matt Polaine | Filed under Bicycle, Cycling, Cycling infrastructure

I have once again been asked ‘why are cyclists still using the road when there is a cycle-lane for them’ and ‘why are cycle-lanes designed so badly’. These questions come up time and again. There are two simple answers to this:

Firstly the local authority transport budgets have been set at pitifully low levels for cycle infrastructure for decades. Thinking that motor traffic orientated road design would suffice, local transport engineers thought they could get away with saying that the millions of pounds spent on a 60mph bypass would benefit cyclists too. Today, less than 1% of local transport budget is spent on cycling facilities, and this is the highest it has been in the UK - ever. Roughly a tenth of what is spent in many European countries, which have been spending their amounts for decades.

Secondly our insurance culture in the UK along with highly risk-averse roadside architecture engineering and risk assessment practices by local authorites has conspired to build cycle-lanes which use motor-traffic signage and attitudes to ensure cyclists are the lowest priority on the highway, giving way to and getting off at almost every junction and every intersection.

Where I live, in Cambridge, there is a recent cycle-lane (well, painted bit of existing pavement, too narrow, unsuitable, but cheap and ticks the Local Plan box) that passes by the airport perimeter. On this perimeter there are about 2 or 3 gates onto the airfield. Chained up with many years vegetation growth around the base. Probably used once a decade. At the point where the cycle lane passes these gates, the cycle lane stops, and Give Way markings are painted either side. This is not painted on the road next to this cycle lane of course, that would be ridiculous.

This mentality is rife throughout the UK, with a whole genre of blogs recording the sheer stupidity of local transport planners creating parodies of cycle infrastructure. There are literally hundreds of examples, and these are just the ones someone has been bothered to photograph and blog. Can you imagine the reaction from drivers if this poor standard was applied to them?

This facility shown left, was at the heart of Coventry’s bid to host the 2020 Olympics. The state-of-the-art stadium provides covered seating for six spectators, with an uninterrupted view of the 5m sprint pursuit event.

As a result of these two factors above, using cycle infrastructure is often at best inconvenient, but often downright dangerous. I resigned as a CTUK trained cycle instructor because I was employed by the local authority Road Safety Department who had very different ideas about road safety to me. I often got into heated rows with (non-cycling) staff over teaching clients to avoid some cycle facilities, facilities put in place by the local authority.

I resigned when I found out that Road Safety staff were told to drive to schools to ‘teach’ children cycle road safety skills in the play ground, not cycle there, because on H&S grounds the employees’ risk in the traffic was too high. I got a sense that something was fundamentaly wrong with this attitude.

Our whole culture around cyclists is flawed in the UK. Stemming from a highly class-orientated society, using a bicycle is still considered a backward step from the motorcar. One becomes a third-class road user and ignored, not respected, and labelled as anarchistic, oddball, retrogressive. A very alien attitude in the rest of Europe.

Why such poor standards of cycle infrastructure continues to be made is a mystery to me. There are many facilities which I wish were not built, as they make the situation even worse. Why can’t UK transport planners get it right? It is not as if there is no guidance or knowledge on the subject.

 I congratulate Coventry City Council for this novel solution (shown left) to the increasing problem of head on crashes between cyclists using narrow paths. The engineers responsible for this facility noticed how central barriers contribute to making motorways our safest roads and realised that this approach could also be used improve the safety of cycle paths.

Over the past 25 years numerous cycle facilities have been constructed, experience gained, research undertaken and a wide variety of technical literature published. Although the design of cycling facilities has continued to advance during this period there has remained a lack of comprehensive design guidance. This leaves the designer reliant upon a wide range of material, often with conflicting standards and advice.

In December 1999 Scotland published Cycling by Design to bring together all the best knowledge in this area. This is not referred to in the UK, and there have been no reasons given not to. Local transport planners do not like being told what to do it would seem.

Cycling by Design’s prime objective is to draw together and to rationalise existing cycle design guidelines into a single comprehensive, coherent reference document which may be used as a source of sound technical advice. This in support of the UK National Cycling Strategy Key Output No.6 “A Commitment to conduct an ongoing review and revision of all design guidance”.

In order to achieve this objective and produce an agreed set of cycling guidelines, it is imperative that Cycling by Design is developed through consultation. The assimilation of the feedback received will be of paramount importance to the document’s successful evolution.

In producing Cycling by Design as a consultation document it has been assumed that the user is working currently within an organisation which is implementing the National Cycling Strategy and is actively involved in the promotion of cycling on the road, in the centre of towns, at the work place and in new developments. This unfortunately is rarely the case with many local transport planners using out-of-date cycle-specific guidelines, if any guidelines at all. In addition to this, those actually building cycle facilities clearly have no idea of the quality required. It is rumoured that mountain bikes with full suspension out-sell all other bicycle types as these bikes are required to cope with the ‘rugged’ terrain provided by local authorities with thier interpretation of a cycle lane.

As well as aiming to provide comprehensive design guidance, the document includes the Cycle Audit System for Trunk Roads which is to be applied forthwith in the development of all future trunk road proposals in Scotland, including related planning proposals. Consultees are welcome to test and/or comment on these together with all other aspects of Cycling by Design.

The IHT, the Bicycle Association, the Cyclist’s Touring Club and the Department of Transport worked together to produce the technical guidelines - “Cycle-Friendly Infrastructure: Guidelines for Planning and Design“. Following the publication of Policy Planning Guidance 13 (Transport) and the development of the National Cycle Strategy, cycling should be of growing importance in transport policies.

The Government says it is committed to sustainable development and sees cycling as an important part of an environment-friendly transport strategy, though funding says different. Many local authorities are already promoting alternatives to the car and token measures to assist cyclists are an integral part of their transportation planning and highway design. Cyclists can only dream of the type of highway integration found in many mainland Europe towns and cities though.

These Guidelines assist those seeking to make highway infrastructure safer and more convenient for cyclists. As the Guidelines point out, dedicated cycle routes are an important part of this, but only a part. Good on-street facilities are also essential if cycling is to be encouraged. A hierarchical approach is recommended, with appropriate emphasis on reducing the volumes and speeds of motor vehicles, as well as using traffic management techniques to reduce accidents and to give cyclists a positive advantage. This is often translated to using cyclists to slow motor traffic down, as can be found in many places in Cambridge. I find using my body on my bicycle to slow an impatient 25 tonne truck down through a narrow street in the city, following at about 1 metre behind me a rather poor way of encouraging cycle use. Especially when I have been cycling at over 25mph in a 20mph zone.

Apparently much has changed since 1984 when the IHT published its original guidelines, “Providing for the Cyclist”, especially the policy context. Many schemes have been implemented, experience gained and new techniques, such as Advanced Stop Lines and Toucan crossings, have been developed. The contents cover the policy framework, traffic management, junction and link design, cycle parking and links to public transport.

Find out more.