AP-11.14 99 Guide To Traffic Engineering Practice Part 14 - Bicycles

Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.
Guide to
Bicycles
STANDARDS AUSTRAUA
Traffic Engineering Practice
H
AUSTROADS
4t*
Part 14 - Bicycles
Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice
Austroads is the association of Australian and New Zealand road transport and traffic authorities whose mission is to
contribute to development and delivery of the Australasian transport vision by:
supporting safe and effective management and use of the road system
developing and promoting national practices
providing professional advice to member organisations and national and international bodies
Within this ambit, Austroads aims to provide strategic direction for the integrated development, management and
operation of the Australian and New Zealand road system - through the promotion of national uniformity and har-
mony, elimination of unnecessary duplication and the identification and application of world best practice.
Austroads membership comprises the six Australian State and two Territory road transport and traffic authorities, the
Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Development, the Australian Local Government Association
and Transit New Zealand.
The success of Austroads is derived from the synergies of interest and participation of member organisations and
others in the road industry.
Member Authorities
Roads and Traffic Authority, New South Wales

Roads Corporation, Victoria (VicRoads)
Department of Main Roads, Queensland
Main Roads, Western Australia
Transport SA, South Australia
Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, Tasmania
Department of Transport and Works, Northern Territory
Department of Urban Services, Australian Capital Territory
Commonwealth Department of Transport & Regional Development
Australian Local Government Association
Transit New Zealand
Austroads National Office

Level 9
287 Elizabeth Street
Sydney, NSW 2000
PO Box K659
Haymarket, NSW, 2000
Australia
Telephone: +612 9264 7088
Fax:+612 9264 1657
Email:info@austroads.com.au
www.austroads.com.au
Austroads
Sydney 1999
Part 14 - Bicycles
First Edition 1993
Technical Writer
Mr Gary Veith, Roads Corporation, Victoria
Second Edition 1999
Publication Review Committee

Mr Michael Dowd (1997)/Mr Brad Donaldson (1998), Roads and Traffic Authority, New South Wales
Mr Gary Veith, Roads Corporation, Victoria (VicRoads)
Mr Jeff Ross, Department of Main Roads, Queensland
Mr Vinder Singh, Department of Transport, Western Australia, representing Main Roads, Western Australia
Mr Peter Watts, Transport SA, South Australia (Project Manager)
Mr David Johnson, Department of Transport, Tasmania
Mr Ian Loftus, Department of Transport and Works, Northern Territory
Mr Tim Morath, Department of Urban Services, Australian Capital Territory
Mr Geoff Clarke, Commonwealth Department of Transport & Regional Development
Mr Frank Siow, Institute of Municipal Engineering Australia, representing Australian Local Government Association
Mr Alix Newman, Christchurch City Council, representing Transit New Zealand
Consultant Technical Writer

Mr Kym Dorrestyn, Dorrestyn & Co Pty Ltd
Figures
Ms Gayle Buckby, Dorrestyn & Co Pty Ltd
Bright Tiger Design
COPYRIGHT © AUSTROADS 1999

AUSTROADS Publication No. AP-11.14/99
National Library of Australia Card Number and ISBN 0 85588 438 X.
Reproduction of extracts from this publication may be made subject to due acknowledgment of the source.
Although this publication is believed to be correct at the time of printing, AUSTROADS does not accept any responsibility for any
consequences arising from the use of information contained in it. People using the information should apply, and rely upon, their
own skill and judgement to the particular issue which they are considering.
In December 1993 Austroads and Standards Australia signed a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the development of
Standards and related documents primarily for the development and management of the Australian road system. Standards Australia's
support for this handbook reflects the co-operative arrangement between the two organisations to ensure there is a coordinated
approach in this area.
STANDARDS AUSTRALIA
V
AUSTROADS works towards uniformity of practice in respect of design, construction and user aspects
of roads and bridges and with this purpose in view, publishes guides and general procedures.
Traffic Engineering Practice, first published in 1965,is a practical guide to traffic engineering for high-
way and transport engineers in Road Authorities, Local Government and engineering consultants, and
as a reference for engineering students.
The 1988 edition of the Guide was published with 10 of the then intended 12 parts. The series has been
expanded to 15 parts as follows:
Part 1 Traffic Flow

2 Roadway Capacity
3 Traffic Studies
4 Road Crashes
5 Intersections at Grade
6 Roundabouts
7 Traffic Signals
Traffic Control Devices
8
9 Arterial Road Traffic Management
10 Local Area Traffic Management
D
11 Parking
12 Roadway Lighting
13 Pedestrians
14 Bicycles
15 Motorcycles
The information contained in the various Parts is intended to be used as a guide to good practice.
Discretion and judgement should be exercised in the light of many factors which may influence the
choice of traffic engineering treatment in any given situation.
These guidelines make reference where relevant to current Australian Standards and are intended to sup-
plement and otherwise assist in their interpretation and application.
Part 14 focuses on technical aspects of designing roads and paths for safe and efficient cycling. This
edition of the guide replaces the AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Part 14 - Bicycles
(1993) and incorporates the latest practice throughout Australia with respect to transportation by bicycle.
The new publication has been prepared after extensive consultation with Australian States and
Territories, New Zealand and other interested groups and stresses the importance of developing com-
plementary bicycle strategies at all levels of government.
Guidelines are provided on the choice of bicycle facility, the design of road/path intersections, traffic
control devices, bicycle parking requirements, pavement design, provision for bicycles at structures and
ènd of trip' facilities. The guide also discusses the characteristics required of a road and path network
and the desirability of encouraging multi mode travel.
Due to variations in `bicycle' legislation across Australia and New Zealand, readers are encouraged to
refer to the appropriate road authority for confirmation of design details.
Table of Contents
Glossary of Terms
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
2. Planning for Cyclists ........................................................................................................ 2

2.1. The Role of Cycling in Transport ...................................................................................... 2
2.2. Bicycle Strategies and Strategic Bicycle Plans .................................................................. 3
2.2.1. Australia Cycling - The National Strategy ........................................................... 3
2.2.2. State or Territory Bicycle Strategy ....................................................................... 3
2.2.3. Local Strategic Bicycle Plans ............................................................................... 4
2.3. Categories of Cyclists ......................................................................................................... 4
2.4. Bicycle Programs ................................................................................................................ 6
2.4.1. Bicycle Route Network & Infrastructure .............................................................. 6
2.4.2. Behavioural Aspects Programs ............................................................................. 10
2.5. Combining Bicycle Travel with Public Transport .............................................................. 11
2.6. Integrated Land Use/Bicycle Planning ............................................................................... 11
2.7. The Development and Evaluation of Bicycle Programs .................................................... 11
2.8. Bicycle Planners ................................................................................................................. 13
3. Bicycle Rider Requirements ............................................................................................ 14

3.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 14
3.2. Space to Ride ...................................................................................................................... 14
3.3. Smooth Surface .................................................................................................................. 14
3.4. Speed Maintenance ............................................................................................................. 14
3.5. Connectivity ........................................................................................................................ 14
3.6. Information ......................................................................................................................... 15
4. Roads .............................................................................................................................. 16
4.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 16
4.2. Road Design Criteria for Cyclists ...................................................................................... 16
4.2.1. Road Geometry ..................................................................................................... 16
4.2.2. Gradients ............................................................................................................... 16
4.2.3. Cross Section & Clearances ................................................................................. 16
4.2.4. Capacity ................................................................................................................ 17
4.2.5. Speed Issues .......................................................................................................... 17
4.2.6. Public Lighting ..................................................................................................... 17
4.3. Provision for Cyclists ......................................................................................................... 17
4.3.1. General ................................................................................................................. 17
4.3.2. Finding Space for Treatment ................................................................................ 19
4.4. Road Treatments for Cyclists ............................................................................................. 20
4.4.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes ........................................................................................ 20
4.4.2. Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes ................................................................................... 23
4.4.3. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes .................................................................................. 27
4.4.4. Sealed Shoulders ................................................................................................... 28
4.4.5. Protected Two-Way Lanes ..................................................................................... 29
4.4.6. Advisory Treatments .............................................................................................. 30
4.4.7. Wide Kerbside Lanes ............................................................................................ 31
4.4.8. Bus/Bicycle Lanes ................................................................................................. 34
4.5. Supplementary Road Treatments ....................................................................................... 34
4.5.1. Curves & Turns ..................................................................................................... 34
4.5.2. Lane Channelisation ............................................................................................. 35
4.5.3. Ramps .................................................................................................................... 36
4.6. Provision for Cyclists on Freeways .................................................................................... 37
4.6.1. General ................................................................................................................. 37
4.6.2. Suitability for Use ................................................................................................. 37
4.6.3. Treatments at Interchanges ................................................................................... 38
4.7. Local Area Traffic Management Schemes ......................................................................... 41
5. Road Intersections ............................................................................................................ 47
5.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 47
5.2. Issues at Intersections for Cyclists ..................................................................................... 47
5.2.1. General ................................................................................................................. 47
5.2.2. Process to Evaluate Conflict for Cyclists ............................................................. 48
5.3. Typical Intersections Details .............................................................................................. 49
5.3.2. Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes ................................................................................... 49
5.3.4. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes .................................................................................. 50
5.3.5. Protected Two-Way lanes ...................................................................................... 50
5.3.6. Shared Traffic Lanes ............................................................................................. 51
5.4. Signalised Intersections ...................................................................................................... 51
5.4.1. Bicycle Detection At Traffic Signals ..................................................................... 51
5.4.2. Signalised Intersection Treatments ....................................................................... 53
5.4.3. Phase Times .......................................................................................................... 60
5.5. Unsignalised Intersections .................................................................................................. 61
5.5.1. Left Turn Slip Lanes .............................................................................................. 61
5.5.2. Roundabouts ......................................................................................................... 63
5.5.3. Service Road Treatments ....................................................................................... 68
6. Paths .............................................................................................................................. 69
6.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 69

6.2. Characteristics of Use ......................................................................................................... 69
6.3. Path Design Criteria for Bicycles ....................................................................................... 70
6.3.1. Bicycle Operating Speeds ..................................................................................... 70
6.3.2. Horizontal Curvature ............................................................................................ 70
6.3.3. Capacity of Paths .................................................................................................. 71
6.3.4. Width of Paths ....................................................................................................... 71
6.3.5. Clearances ............................................................................................................ 72
6.3.6. Gradient ................................................................................................................ 72
6.3.7. Sight Distance ....................................................................................................... 73
6.3.8. Superelevation, Crossfall & Drainage .................................................................. 75
6.4. Path Function ...................................................................................................................... 77
6.4.1. Utility & Commuter Use ....................................................................................... 77
6.4.2. Recreational Bicycle Use ...................................................................................... 77
6.5. Location of Paths for Cycling ............................................................................................ 77
6.5.1. Factors of Influence -Path Location .................................................................... 77
6.5.2. Factors Influencing Roadside Alignment .............................................................. 80
6.5.3. Paths in Medians ................................................................................................... 81
6.6. Types of Paths for Cycling ................................................................................................. 81
6.6.1. Shared Use Paths .................................................................................................. 83
6.6.2. Separated Paths .................................................................................................... 86
6.6.3. Exclusive Bicycle Paths ........................................................................................ 90
6.7. Intersections of Paths with Roads ...................................................................................... 92
6.7.1. Path Approach Design Criteria ............................................................................ 92
6.7.2. Crossings of Roads ............................................................................................... 92
6.7.3. Ancillary Treatments & Features .......................................................................... 96
6.8. Intersections of Paths with Paths ........................................................................................ 103
6.9. Public Lighting of Paths ..................................................................................................... 104
6.9.1. Demand for Lighting and Standards .................................................................... 104
6.9.2. Objectives of Lighting on Paths for Cycling ........................................................ 106
7. Provision at Structures ..................................................................................................... 107

7.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 107
7.2. Road Bridges ...................................................................................................................... 107
7.2.3. Use of Footpaths on Narrow Bridges ................................................................... 108
7.2.4. Full Integration of Cyclists ................................................................................... 108
7.2.5. Two-way Shared Path on One Side of Structure ................................................... 108
7.3. Road Tunnels ...................................................................................................................... 109
7.4. Grade Separated Crossings ................................................................................................. 109
7.4.1. Bicycle Bridges ..................................................................................................... 110
7.4.2. Overpasses ............................................................................................................ 110
7.4.3. Underpasses .......................................................................................................... 110
7.4.4. Desirable Widths ................................................................................................... 111
7.4.5. Approach Ramps ................................................................................................... 111
7.5. Bridge Surfaces .................................................................................................................. 111
7.6. Supplementary Treatments ................................................................................................. 111
7.6.1. Bicycle Wheeling Ramps ....................................................................................... 111
7.6.2. Fences & Batters ................................................................................................... 112
8. Construction and Maintenance ....................................................................................... 116

8.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 116
8.2. Construction & Maintenance of Roads .............................................................................. 116
8.3. Construction & Maintenance of Paths ............................................................................... 118
8.4. Provision at Works .............................................................................................................. 118
8.5. Surfaces for Cycling ........................................................................................................... 119
8.5.1. Tolerances ............................................................................................................. 119
8.5.2. Pavements for Bicycle Paths ................................................................................. 119
8.5.3. Timber Surfaces .................................................................................................... 121
8.6. Quality Systems .................................................................................................................. 121

8.6.1. General ................................................................................................................. 121
8.6.2. Bicycle Safety Audits ............................................................................................. 121
9. Traffic Control Devices .................................................................................................... 122

9.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 122
9.2. Regulatory Signs ................................................................................................................ 122
9.2.1. Bicycle Lane Designation ..................................................................................... 122
9.2.2. Exclusive Bicycle Path Designation ..................................................................... 122
9.2.3. Shared Use Path Designation ............................................................................... 122
9.2.4. Separated Path Designation ................................................................................. 124
9.2.5. Bicycle Prohibition ............................................................................................... 124
9.2.6. Bicycle Control Sign ............................................................................................. 124
9.2.7. Give Way Sign ....................................................................................................... 124
9.2.8. `Bicycles Excepted' Signs ..................................................................................... 124
9.3. Warning Signs .................................................................................................................... 124
9.4. Guide Signs ........................................................................................................................ 125
9.5. Other Useful Signs ............................................................................................................. 127
9.6. Pavement Markings ............................................................................................................ 128
9.6.1. Roads .................................................................................................................... 128
9.6.2. Paths ...................................................................................................................... 130
9.7. Pavement Surface Colour ................................................................................................... 130
10. End of Trip Facilities ........................................................................................................ 132

10.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 132
10.2. Showers and Lockers .......................................................................................................... 132
10.3. Parking .............................................................................................................................. 132
10.3.1. General ................................................................................................................. 132
10.3.2. Need for Secure Bicycle Parking .......................................................................... 132
10.3.3. General Requirements of Devices ......................................................................... 134
10.3.4. Location of Bicycle Parking Facilities .................................................................. 134
10.3.5. Types of Parking Devices ...................................................................................... 134
10.3.6. Signs and Markings Showing Location and Purpose of Parking Facilities......... 140
Appendix A: Example of Bicycle Safety Audit Checklist ........................................................... 143
Appendix B: Signing and Delineation of Works ......................................................................... 147
Appendix C: Human Powered Vehicles ...................................................................................... 150
References .............................................................................................................................. 152

Absolute Maximum: A dimension above which the treatment cannot be used under any circumstances.
Absolute Minimum: A dimension below which the treatment cannot be used under any circumstances.
Acceptable Maximum: A dimension that is at the upper limit of acceptable dimensions and above
which the treatment can only be used in certain conditions and which may be associated with certain
precautions e.g. signage.
Acceptable Minimum: A dimension that is at the lower limit of acceptable dimensions and below
which the treatment can only be used in certain conditions and which may be associated with certain
precautions e.g. signage.
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT): The total annual traffic volume in both directions at a road
location, divided by the number of days in the year (applicable to motor traffic unless noted otherwise).
Arterial Road: A road with a prime function to provide for major regional and inter-regional traffic
movements.
Batter: Embankment at the side of and sloping to or from a path or road (sect. 7.6.2).
Bicycle: In this guide, the discussions relating to vehicle and rider characteristics generally assume a
two wheeled vehicle propelled by muscular force, exerted by a rider through pedals, as distinct from say
`human powered vehicles', which whilst accommodated in recommendations throughout the guide, are
treated in detail but separately.
However, in legislation a bicycle is defined more broadly e.g., a vehicle with 1 or more wheels that is
built to be propelled by human power through a belt, chain or gears (whether or not it has an auxiliary
motor), and includes a pedicab, penny-farthing and unicycle; but not a wheelchair, wheeled toy, or any
vehicle with an auxiliary motor capable of generating a power output over 200 watts.
Bicycle/Car Parking Lane: A lane combination used on roads where one section is designated for the
exclusive use of cyclists and the other for motor-vehicle parking (sect. 4.4.2).
Bicycle Path: A path or path section intended for the exclusive use of cyclists, generally referred to in
this document as an exclusive bicycle path (sect. 6.6.3).
Bollard: A Path Terminal device consisting of a short post or other isolated vertical ùpstand' generally
erected to prevent or guide access at a critical point (sect. 6.7.3.1(e)).
Carriageway: Area of a road reserve provided for the movement or parking of vehicles.
Collector Road: A road with a prime function to distribute traffic between arterial roads and local
streets.
Conflict Zone: In relation to intersection crossings, is that area from the point where a vehicle enters
an intersection to the last point of conflict with another legal movement of traffic (including pedestrians)
- (sect. 5.4.3(c)).
Connectivity: Refer Section 3.5.
Conspicuity: In this instance, describes the degree to which cyclists are readily observed.
Containment Fence: Physical barrier sufficient to provide separation between the travelled path, or
paths used by cyclists and pedestrians, from the work area, but not so rigid as to become a hazard if
struck by vehicles, or to act as a `safety barrier'.
Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane: A bicycle lane deployed on one (left) side of a one way street serving
cyclists travelling against what is otherwise the legal direction of travel (sect. 4.4.3)
Cyclist: Rider of a bicycle or human powered vehicle.

Design Speed: A speed unlikely to be exceeded by most cyclists or drivers as appropriate, and not less
than the 851h percentile speed. It is used to coordinate sight distance, radius, superelevation and friction
demand for elements of the road or path so that cyclists or drivers negotiating each element will not be
exposed to unexpected hazards.
Desirable: The dimension provided in tables specifying the width of bicycle lane or path treatment
facilities, which is normally used. For new construction it would be appropriate to use this dimension.
Desire Line: Route chosen by cyclists (or other road or path users if relevant) irrespective of the
presence of a route, path or other facility.
Dual Use Path: Path now referred to as a Shared Use Path
Exclusive Bicycle Lane: A lane designated for the exclusive use of cyclists generally located at the side
of a road.
Footpath: An area open to the public that is designated for, or has as one of its main uses, use by
pedestrians, but does not include a shared use path.
Freeway: A highway for through traffic with full control of access and with grade separation at
intersections.
Full Barrier Fence: A fence provided to generally prevent access to a slope or fall which due to the
height of the fall, the existence of obstacles or grade of the batter, could result in injury
Grade Separation: Physical (vertical) separation of opposing roads and/or paths.
Gradient: The longitudinal slope of a road or path, usually represented as the ratio of a one metre
vertical rise to the horizontal distance (e.g. 1:50), or expressed as a percentage (e.g. 2%).
Groove: Narrow depression or rut in what is otherwise a relatively flat and smooth riding surface, which
could catch a bicycle wheel where it is parallel to the direction of travel. (sect. 8.5.1).
Highway: A principal road in a road system.
Holding Rail: A rail used by cyclists to assist them to avoid having to remove/detach their feet/shoes
from their pedals, so they can wait in a ready position (for cycling) at intersections (sect. 6.7.3.2).
Hook (Box) Turn: Where a rider approaches and enters an intersection adjacent to the left edge of a
road, until the rider is as near as practicable to the far edge of the road that the rider is entering. Then,
the rider proceeds along the entering road with a green light or otherwise after giving way to
approaching vehicles (sect. 5.4.2.4).
Human Powered Vehicles: In this instance, refers to the array of alternative forms of pedal powered
and hand cranked vehicles including recumbents, tandems, tricycles, and bicycles with trailers.
Intersection Crossing Time: The period it takes a cyclist to pass through an intersection, from the point
of entering a signalised intersection (from the stop bar) to the last point of conflict with another legal
movement of traffic (including pedestrians) - (sect. 5.4.3(c))
Journey: Relates to longer travel events such as those with a period of a day or several days.
Local Access Path: Minor path generally located in a local or residential area, that links road and/or
other path cycling routes.
Local Street: A street with a prime function to provide access to adjacent land uses.
Multi Modal Transport: Combination of bicycle travel and other modes of travel (sect. 2.5).
Nature Strip: The area between a road and adjacent land, but does not include a bicycle path, footpath
or shared path
Partial Barrier Fence: A fence provided to reduce the likelihood of access to a slope or fall which due
to the height of the fall, the existence of obstacles or grade of the batter, could result in injury
Path Terminal: A device or treatment generally used adjacent to the intersection of paths and roads
primarily to limit the possibility of path cyclists from entering a road unknowingly or at speed, or
alternatively to prevent access by unauthorised vehicles (sect. 6.7.3.1).
Pedestrian: A person walking, and including people in wheelchairs, on roller skates or riding on `toy
vehicles' such as skate boards or other vehicles, other than a bicycle, powered by human effort or a
motor and with a maximum speed of 10 km/h.
Percentile Speed: Speed at or below which the nominated percentage (e.g. 15, 50, 85) of vehicles are
observed to travel under free flow conditions.
Projection: Effectively a narrowing of the road carriageway by an adjustment in the kerb line generally
over of short distance, that may be either raised (kerbed) or constructed of pavement bars and markings,
and may consist of an island or continuous kerbing.
Road: An area that is open to or used by the public and is developed for, or has as one of its main uses,
the driving or riding of vehicles.
Road Authorities: State road authority, municipality, other body or individual responsible for the care,
control and maintenance of bicycle route infrastructure.
Road Reserve: Land comprising the road and adjoining nature strips.
Safety Barrier: A physical barrier separating the work area or paths used by cyclists and pedestrians,
from motor traffic, designed to resist penetration by an out-of-control vehicle and as far as practicable,
to redirect colliding vehicles back into the travelled path.
Safety Strip: Refer Section 9.6.1.2
Sealed Shoulder: Refers to the sealed edge of roads outside of the travelled carriageway (the shoulder)
of roads where cyclists might be expected to ride. It is delineated by an edge line applied between the
sealed shoulder and the travelled section of a carriageway. The treatment is almost invariably associated
with unkerbed roads, and is often applicable to rural roads (sect. 4.4.4).
Segregated Path: Path now referred to as a Separated Path
Separated Path: A path divided into separated sections one of which is designated for the exclusive use
of cyclists and an alternate section for other path users (sect. 6.6.2).
Shared Use Path: A path open to the public that is designated for, or has as one of its main uses, use
by both cyclists and pedestrians, but does not include a separated footpath or a footpath adjacent to a
road (sect. 6.6.1).
Slow Point: An isolated narrowing of a carriageway introduced as a traffic calming measure.
Speed Environment: Effectively the 85th percentile speed for a particular road or path section.
Speed Maintenance: An important `bicycle rider requirement', this term refers to that quality of routes
that permits cyclists to maintain their speed (sect. 3.4).
Squeeze Point: A narrowing in a travelled section of a path or road that may be hazardous to cyclists
who are forced to move nearer to or into an adjacent stream of traffic.
Stairway Wheeling Ramp: A stairway with a ramp beside it, preferably with a channel, along which a
bicycle can roll (sect. 7.6.1).
Step: Abrupt rise or difference in levels in the riding surface, (sect. 8.5.1).
Storage: Def 1: In relation to bicycle route facilities, refers to the space used by cyclists to wait (or
`store') or so as to enhance safety (e.g. sect. 5.4.2.3).
Storage: Def 2: In relation to bicycle parking, the terms storage or parking are similar (e.g. Table 10-3).
Strategic Bicycle Route: A route which experiences the highest level of use by cyclists, or has the
potential to do so with the implementation of a route or route network, or a route defined by a strategic
or local bicycle plan. Includes principal bicycle network routes, and arterial and collector roads.
Tidal Flow: Where traffic moves predominantly in one direction only on a two-way road (or path)
during a certain period, and in the other direction during a subsequent period.
Trip: Relates to short or regular travel events in this instance.
Wide Kerbside Lane: A motor traffic lane free of parked cars, and of sufficient width to permit cyclists
and other motor traffic to travel along a road within a lane generally located at the left side of a road,
without significant impact on each others paths. May be associated with a two-way/two-lane road or a
multi lane road (SBC 1987b) - (sect. 4.4.7).
Work Area: Specific area where maintenance or construction work is being done.
Work Site: Area that includes the work area(s) and any additional length of road or path required for
advance signing, tapers, side-tracks or other areas needed for associated purposes.
Note: The definitions in the Glossary are relevant to the discussions in this guide. Care may be required
in the use of these, as definitions vary in different documents and in traffic legislation e.g. the term
'bicycle'. In addition some of the definitions under legislation in some States differ from those in similar
legislation in other States.
1
1 Introduction
This document is intended as a guide for road authorities, continuous routes usually on the road network. They also
engineers, planners and designers involved in the plan- seek secure parking, lockers, changing facilities, and a
ning, design and construction of cycling facilities. shower at their destination. On the other hand recreational
Guidelines are provided on the appropriate construction cyclists desire enjoyable journeys that may or may not
measures for various types of cycling facilities. It also rep- have a specific destination.
resents a comprehensive resource document on a range of
issues associated with cycling. It is intended to provide a Authorities responsible for roads have an important role to
basis for national uniformity in planning and designing for play in encouragement of bicycle travel as they produce the
bicycle use. environment in which safe, convenient and comfortable
cycling can take place. It is vital that road authorities, engi-
Bicycles are defined as vehicles under road traffic regula- neers, planners and designers understand the nature of
tions and therefore cyclists have a right to use virtually the cycling; that many commuting cyclists will prefer to use
entire road system. Bicycles are especially suited to trips the quickest (usually most direct) route utilising main
less than 5 km, and trips up to 20 km long are readily roads, local streets and paths as the need arises. Providing
achieved by a rider of average fitness. As most car trips lie adequate encouragement for cycling therefore requires the
within this range, the bicycle, individually and in conjunc- consideration of this mode of transport in all road planning,
tion with public transport, should play an important role in design, construction and maintenance activities. In each
reducing dependence on the motor car for trips related to town or city, a network of on-road and off-road routes
work, education, recreation, commerce and shopping. Use should be identified and improvements systematically
of the bicycle for a greater portion of commuter trips implemented to cater for the various bicycle users. It
would have a positive impact with respect to the environ- should also be understood that cyclists basically need a
ment and community health. smooth hazard-free riding environment and, where they
share roads, they need sufficient space to operate safely
The full potential of the bicycle as a mode of transport can alongside motor vehicles.
only be achieved through the development of comprehen-
sive strategies and programs involving all relevant levels of Whilst the pro-active development of a cycle network is
government, and input from cyclist user groups and other important to convenient and safe travel by bicycle, it is
relevant stakeholders. Specific Encouragement programs more important that the wider transport policies and pro-
can be provided to introduce people to recreational bicycle grams cater for cycling in an integrated manner. In order
riding and its benefits but encouragement of greater use of to maximise the role of cycling in local transport, cycling
bicycles for transport depends on the development of effec- provisions and good design will need to be included in all
tive and complementary programs in Education, transport infrastructure projects. Traffic management and
Engineering, Enforcement and Encouragement. On the parking control projects can make cycling more competi-
broadest scale bicycle riding can be encouraged by planning tive in congested urban centres. Marketing campaigns can
authorities through policies which encourage higher densi- shift consumer preferences to cycling for local trips. Land
ty urban development, ensuring bicycle access into and use planning policies also impact on travel patterns and
through all new land developments, traffic management trip lengths and thereby have a significant impact upon the
strategies which assist bicycle travel and the provision of viability of cycling as a transport mode.
satisfactory showers and parking facilities in the workplace.
It is important to understand that bicycle riders include

people with a very wide range of skill, from novices to
experts, and also people who travel for a variety of reasons
which can broadly be categorised as either utility travel
(specific trip purpose) or recreational travel. It is essential
that the land transport system adequately cater for this
wide range of riders and trip purposes even though this
may result in more than one type of bicycle facility along
a given route. For example, commuter cyclists, commut-
ing to work or for another specific trip purpose, use bicy-
cles for daily travel and therefore seek convenient, direct,
2 BICYCLES
2 Planning for Cyclists
2.1. The Role of Cycling in Transport continuing use of `bicycle friendly' local area traffic
management schemes and appropriate design of new
Cycling currently fulfils an important transport role within residential areas to create pleasant and safe neighbour-
communities. Surveys conducted in major Australian hood environments (Refer Australian Model Code for
cities during the 1980's have shown that cycling is popu- Residential Development);
lar and is increasing in popularity as a means of transport
and for recreation. There is relatively little data available dedication of road space to specific users (e.g. lanes for
on national bicycle usage. However, various references exclusive use by trucks, buses, car pools or bicycles);
indicate that approximately 5% of all trips are made by
bicycle and 20% of the population regularly use a bicycle cleaner, quieter and more efficient motor vehicles; and
(at least once a fortnight). Furthermore, bicycle use in home based work through the application of modern
some cities is growing by 10% per annum. It is therefore communication technologies.
essential that road authorities, engineers, planners and
designers determine what is needed for these road users on The management of traffic impacts on cities is likely to
all existing and proposed roads in the network and move require the use of all the above measures to some extent,
to provide necessary facilities. and a number involve cultural change and are long term
options. However, improvement in the short to medium
The efficient transportation of people and goods in cities term is likely to be achieved through implementing local
is essential if the economic and social needs of society are (street or neighbourhood) and intermediate (zone,
to be met. The modes of transport which play important precinct, corridor, regional) measures and by encouraging
roles in satisfying these needs include trucks, bicycles, people to use modes of transport other than the motor car.
trains, trams, buses, taxis, motor cycles and private motor
cars. The private motor car is the favoured mode (by the Cycling is a clean and efficient mode of transport that is
community at large) for most trips in cities. It can, howev- well suited to many of the trips currently made in cars,
er, have undesirable aspects in relation to traffic conges- particularly in inner urban areas. Many car trips, including
tion, road safety, noise and air pollution. These impacts travel to work, are less than 10 kilometres, a distance that
have led to extensive use of local area traffic management can be covered in many inner urban areas as quickly on a
schemes over the past decade and provision of noise atten- bicycle as in a car.
uation measures on major new road projects.
There is considerable potential for the bicycle to provide a
There is also an increasing realisation in communities that clean and efficient alternative mode for many current
it may not be possible or desirable to provide sufficient motor car trips. In view of community concerns about
road space to completely meet the growing demand for health, about pollution, the greenhouse effect and the envi-
travel by private motor car. Consequently, many planning, ronmental damage caused by motor vehicle emissions, the
highway and local authorities are either examining or wider use of the bicycle should be promoted as a non-pol-
implementing measures which may be used to achieve an luting form of transport.
acceptable balance between the transport and communica-
If significant numbers of people are to be encouraged to
tion needs of communities and the need to maintain or
use bicycles instead of cars they need to be convinced that
enhance the amenity of residential areas, towns and cities.
it is a reasonably safe, convenient, healthy and enjoyable
The range of measures that may be necessary in future
way to travel. Moreover they need to feel that they are per-
could include:
sonally secure. Personal security is related to many
the development of more efficient uses of transport aspects of society other than those associated with engi-
systems by gaining greater capacity from existing neering and planning, but these disciplines should also
facilities through changes to pricing policies, land use consider the personal security of cyclists in the design and
strategies, parking policies, and the like; maintenance of facilities. This may relate to the provision
of adequate lighting, maintenance of landscaping along
environmentally adapted `through' roads which may paths, direction signs and the provision of frequent exit
maintain existing traffic volumes but at a reduced points from off-road paths to the street system.
speed;
Encouragement of cycling as a means of transport also
exclusion of motor traffic from town or city centres in requires comprehensive planning and the development of
favour of pedestrian shopping precincts; complementary programs dealing with education,
PLANNING FOR CYCLISTS 3
enforcement, engineering and encouragement so that costs in the community, less traffic on our roads and clean-
people choose to cycle. er air. The goal is to double bicycle use by the year 2004.
Cycling also plays an important part in recreation within The Strategy contains deliverable objectives, with targets,
the community. It contributes to the general health and time-frames and responsibilities that will ensure cycling
well being of the community and is an excellent recre- plays an important part in our transport and recreation sys-
ational family activity for people of all ages. Many cyclists tems.
are encouraged as a result of recreational experiences, to
use their bicycles for non-recreational trips. The objectives of the Strategy are that:
Australia Cycling is implemented and reviewed in a

2.2. Bicycle Strategies and Strategic coordinated and collaborative manner;
Bicycle Plans
policy and planning integrates cycling as a valued
It is essential that planning for cyclists occur at many dif- element;
ferent levels from the development of broad policies and
strategies to relatively small local projects. It involves a facilities exist that support increased cycling;
commitment from all levels of government and input from
the general public, bicycle associations and local bicycle safety for cyclists, on and off road, is continuously
groups. The main goal of bicycle planning is to encourage improved;
cycling as a desirable alternative to motor vehicle travel
the benefits of cycling are recognised by decision
and to provide community and government programs
makers and the Australian community; and

which will provide for safe and convenient travel by bicy-
cle whilst maintaining a satisfactory level of service for all cycling is incorporated into all appropriate areas of
other road users. education, training and professional development.
The development of strategies is important because they
provide a framework and direction for the development 2.2.2. State or Territory Bicycle Strategy
and coordination of programs throughout government and
State or Territory strategies on cycling are necessary to set
should constitute a commitment to various initiatives and
a direction and provide a framework within ,vhich various
actions. They also provide for the integration of cyclists'
responsible agencies can plan and work. They also speci-
needs into all planning and design activities including
fy important strategic action areas and items and nominate
commercial and industrial building designs, land develop-
responsible `lead agencies'. Most States and Territories
ment plans, subdivision plans, road designs and road
have already adopted a strategy.
maintenance programs.
Therefore bicycle planning needs to include: It is desirable that the specific aims of a State-wide
strategy:
development of broad bicycle policies and bicycle
strategies at both National and State bases which establish a key group to administer and coordinate the
includes all aspects of cycling, involves all relevant implementation of the strategy;
departments and municipalities, and assigns responsi-
bilities; and ensure that planning for cycling is integrated within
overall transport and land use planning, urban devel-
development of local strategic bicycle plans on a opment, building rules, traffic management and com-
municipal basis which sets local strategies and defines munity planning;
local bicycle networks in relation to the Principal or
Regional Bicycle Network (if one exists). These plans give priority to those areas where the existing or poten-
should also identify local needs for programs, and for tial demand for cycling is highest;
road and path improvements.
ensure that cyclists have suitable and legitimate access
These strategies and plans provide a statement of actions to roads and paths, where appropriate;
which are based, although not necessarily rigidly, on
encouragement, education, engineering and enforcement. ensure the development of programs promoting
cycling as a legitimate form of transport;
2.2.1. Australia Cycling - The National Strategy
ensure the development of behavioural and safety
Australia Cycling - The National Strategy 1999 - 2004 awareness programs aimed at improving cyclist safety
(AUSTROADS, 1999) provides a framework for the deliv- in general;
ery of programs that will increase cycling participation.
This will result in an enhanced well being for all ensure support for key promotional activities e.g. Bike
Australians. The benefits derived include lower health Week, Ride to Work;
4 BICYCLES
ensure appropriate legislative framework for cycling identify a practical bicycle route network with appro-
having regard to safety, good traffic engineering prac- priate links to adjacent regions or networks;
tice and credibility of the law;
develop engineering measures and programs to over-
encourage cycling for the environmental, recreational come problems including estimated costs, time frame
and health benefits to cyclists and the wider and an implementation plan;
community;
develop bicycle network support requirements (e.g.
reduce the frequency of bicycle crashes and the sever- bicycle parking, kerb ramps, drinking water fountains,
ity of injuries resulting from crashes; signage);
develop encouragement and other appropriate behav-

coordinate the provision of cycling facilities and pro-
ioural programs, with an aim of increasing the use of
grams across relevant agencies and organisations;
cycling facilities as well as the safety of cycling, in the
develop, implement and maintain a state wide bicycle local area;
route network incorporating metropolitan routes, inter- review law enforcement and compliance with local by-
regional routes and routes within regional centres and laws;
municipalities;
review the requirements for development applications
ensure cycling facilities and programs are readily in regard to cycling (e.g. bicycle parking and shower
accessible; facilities); and
ensure cycling facilities serve the needs of the relevant review construction and maintenance practices and
categories of cyclists; educate staff responsible for these tasks, so they
accommodate the needs of cyclists in their work (e.g.
provide guidance to encourage a high level of compli- landscaping, road works and irrigation).
ance by cyclists with traffic laws, and by other road
and path users in relation to cyclists, covering both For the community to derive maximum benefit from its
educational and enforcement needs; Local Strategic Bicycle Plan it is essential that the plan
produce positive, practical and affordable outcomes, that
encourage the establishment of a strong and pro-active meet user needs.
cycling industry, including manufacturers, traders and
the tourism industry operators; It is suggested that the development of these local strate-
gic bicycle plans should be overseen by a Steering
ensure the systematic measuring, auditing or evalua- Committee comprised of representatives of:
tion, of programs and facilities; and
the Council;
facilitate on-going research and investigation of new
Council engineering, urban planning and recreation
initiatives.
staff;
2.2.3. Local Strategic Bicycle Plans the State Road Authority;
Local Strategic Bicycle Plans can be developed on a the Police;

municipal basis or a regional basis where a number of local schools;
municipalities share resources. The purpose of these plans
is to translate many of the aims of the State-wide strategy cyclists;
into practical programs and projects at the local level.
bicycle industry;
Local strategic bicycle plans should, however, concentrate
on the development of solutions to problems that exist local industry; and
within the municipality or region rather than deal with the local community.
general issues.
The basic aims of the local plans would usually include 2.3. Categories of Cyclists
the following:
There are seven broad groups of cyclists for which plan-
survey the extent and nature of cycling within the ners and engineers have to cater, which indicates that
municipality or region; cyclists are a very diverse group of road users. They
determine the cycling requirements of the community; include those who have not achieved a legal qualification
to drive a motor car, and as such have not received formal
identify factors that inhibit cycling; education on road traffic laws. In addition, a cyclist may
fulfil a number of needs on a single trip, or a cyclist may Commuter cyclists often travel significant distances, wear
belong to more than one group. special clothing, generate a lot of body heat and can have
a large investment in their bicycle and equipment. They
The broad groups are:
therefore need suitable end of trip facilities including
Primary school children; showers, lockers and secure bicycle parking. These
aspects should be taken into account when planning facil-
Secondary school children; ities for this group.
Recreational cyclists;
Utility cyclists ride for varying but specific purposes, such
Commuter cyclists; as for shopping, travel to community facilities or to visit
friends. Their routes are unpredictable but in general of a
Utility cyclists;
relatively short length, and occur along roads not subject
Touring cyclists; and to high levels of traffic. The skill level of utility cyclists
varies greatly. Their needs include the provision of a com-
Sports cyclists in training. prehensive network of `low stress' routes and appropriate
Each group has specific characteristics, and hence specif- end of trip facilities, at various commercial and institu-
ic needs with respect to programs and facilities. tional destinations.
The cognitive skills of primary school children are not Touring cyclists make extensive long distance journeys or
fully developed (Sandels S. 1974: Hoffman, Payne and shorter trips around local areas of tourist significance.
Prescott, 1978) and young children also have little They travel both solo and in groups, and may be either
knowledge of road traffic laws. For these reasons chil- lightly or heavily (to be self sufficient) equipped. Often,
dren of a primary school age should only ride on or near their route choice characteristics are similar to other
roads with supervision until they have the skills and tourists.
knowledge to do so alone. Generally, the appropriate
facility for primary school children is an off-road path or
Sporting cyclists travel long distances on the arterial road
a `quiet' residential street.
system in training for the various events in which they
The skill of secondary school students varies greatly. For compete. They often travel in groups of two or more and
older students (14 and over), the majority of cycling takes ride two abreast in States and Territories where it is legal
place on-road. Off road facilities provided for this group to do so, thus occupying the left hand lane of the road. The
are often under-utilised if the road system is more direct routes they use for training are often different to those
and faster. used by commuter cyclists and may involve challenging
terrain in outer urban and rural areas. However, many
The experience, age and skill of recreational cyclists also
sporting cyclists also commute to work as part of their
vary greatly. They generally desire a pleasant recreational
training. The needs of sporting cyclists on the road system
experience along off-road paths and quiet local streets,
are similar to commuters; their primary requirements
avoiding congested, heavily trafficked routes. Nevertheless,
a large proportion of experienced recreational cyclists will
being a smooth even surface and adequate space to oper-
prefer to use the road system for long journeys. ate safely. Off-road paths are generally not suitable for this
group to train on because of the high speeds and potential
There are two types of commuter cyclists; those who conflict with other path users.
prefer paths or low stress roads and are willing to take
longer to get to their destination, and those who wish to Because each of the above groups have different charac-
get to their destination as quickly as possible regardless of teristics it will often be necessary to provide facilities for
traffic conditions. The former type vary greatly in age, more than one group within an area or corridor. For exam-
skill and fitness. The latter type are usually highly skilled ple, it may be necessary and appropriate to provide a bicy-
and are generally able to handle a variety of traffic condi- cle lane or wide kerbside lane for commuter cyclists, as
tions including the high stress levels experienced on busy well as a separate path for primary school children (refer
arterial roads. Their primary requirements are space to Figure 2-1). In these instances it will be necessary to eval-
operate (wide kerbside lane or an exclusive bicycle lane) uate the costs and benefits of providing for each group in
and a smooth, even surface.
the development of programs and budgets. Where facili-
These commuter cyclists are concerned with travel time ties are shared by different bicycle user groups attention
and therefore prefer to use the most direct and convenient needs to be paid to the design (e.g. width, horizontal align-
route. They often have no reasonable choice other than to ment, gradient) of facilities to ensure safe and efficient
use undesirably busy roads, and therefore often `choose' to operation. It may also be necessary to regulate and enforce
use other slower routes where the arterial road conditions the appropriate use of off-road facilities where the conflict
are intolerable to them. between different groups becomes a problem.
6 BICYCLES
ational trips. Also included are new paths along major

road project reservations opening new transport corri-
dors to cyclists. An example of a Principal Bicycle
Network is shown in Figure 2-2;
designated local networks and routes designed to provide

low stress routes, to feed the Principal or Regional net-
work, and to provide for shorter local trips to shopping
centres, recreational centres and railway stations etc.;
the full construction of route sections between origins

and destinations consistent with the route purpose,
during the course of staged implementation processes.
For example, if a route were intended to serve utility or
Figure 2-1: On and Off-Road Facilities child cyclists primarily then it would be inappropriate
for it to end at an arterial road;
2.4. Bicycle Programs convenient bicycle access into and through all residen-
tial, commercial and industrial subdivisions and major
Bicycle programs are concerned with both transport net- developments, including pedestrian malls if conflict
work improvements and behavioural issues. The objective with pedestrians is not likely to be a problem;
is to make cycling safer, more convenient and hence an
attractive alternative means of transport. Programs will the ability to carry bicycles on public transport vehi-
address issues relating to education, encouragement, cles so that multi mode travel using bicycles and public
enforcement and engineering but these 4 E's should usual- transport becomes more attractive for longer trips
ly be regarded as inter-related components of the same (sect. 2.5);
program, rather than separate programs. For example, as a
network of bicycle routes is developed within a city or secure long term and short term bicycle parking facili-
town (Engineering) it will be necessary to: ties in shopping centres, in all commercial, industrial
and institutional developments, at railway stations and
promote it through advertising, pamphlets and maps at bus, tram, ferry and airport terminals (sect. 10.3);
(Encouragement);
teach people who use it how to ride safely and courte- shower facilities in commercial and industrial build-
ously (Education); and ings (sect. 10.2);
insist that relevant laws and regulations be obeyed for safe routes to schools;
the benefit of all users (Enforcement).
well defined exclusive bicycle lanes on all arterial and
These components should be addressed in National and collector roads in particular, where a significant cyclist
State (or Territory) strategies, and in local strategic bicycle demand exists (or where it is desired to encourage
plans. increased use of bicycles) and space is available; pro-
vision of kerbside lanes of an adequate width to
2.4.1. Bicycle Route Network & Infrastructure accommodate cyclists on all other roads where space is
available (sect. 4.4.1).
2.4.1.1. General
The improvement and extension of transport networks to It should be noted that many off-road paths are not
better accommodate cycling involves many disciplines suitable for commuter cyclists because the paths are
within engineering including planning, design, construc- indirect and do not lead to useful destinations;
tion and maintenance. In this context transport networks
do not only include off-road paths but all roads and the the adoption of road and path construction and mainte-
public transport system as well. The objective is to provide nance practices which result in road and path surfaces
a comprehensive network that will suit the desire lines of which are free of debris and smooth enough to provide
cyclists by connecting common origins and destinations of a reasonable level of comfort for cyclists (sect's. 8.2
trips. Engineering programs and initiatives should aim to and 8.3);
achieve the following:
`calming' of traffic in local street networks, in a
A designated Principal or Regional Bicycle Network manner that does not reduce the convenience or safety
comprised of major roads, minor roads and paths of cycling, to fully integrate bicycle and motor traffic
intended to serve longer distance commuter and recre- (sect. 4.7);
paths which are interesting, wide enough to allow groups where conflict between groups creates safety or
cyclists to safely pass each other or pedestrians; have operational problems (sect. 9); and
adequate geometric design including stopping sight
high standard exclusive bicycle paths where there is a
distance across the inside of curves; do not have steep
demand for high speed commuter travel (sect. 6.6.3).
downgrades combined with tight horizontal curves
(sect. 6); The illustration in Figure 2-3 provides a summary of the
physical measures which may be taken to improve and
implementation of regulatory, warning and guidance develop a road and path network so that it supports cycling
signs or other controls on paths used by a mix of user as a safe and convenient mode of transport.
Figure 2-2: Principal Bicycle Network
Legend
000000000000 Existing On Road Bicycle Facility
- - - - - - - Proposed On Road Bicycle Facility
Existing Off Road Bicycle Facility
[3E3[3[3[3[31313131 3[313 Proposed Off Road Facility

8
00
I
' 11
_____
- LJ
U
BICYCLES
__________
JC
-
I
I 1
ii'
RAILWAY STATION
TtON
1 Smooth debris free 5 Shared footway at squeeze 9 Controlled crossings for 13 Paths for recreation and connec- 17 Connections to paths
surfaces on all roads point cyclists and pedestrians tion of housing areas to commu-
nity facilities and city centre 1s 'Bicycle friendly' local area
2O Exclusive bike lanes O Shared footway alternative to 8 Centre of road refuge traffic management to lower
on arterial roads road at roundabout 1a Bridges connecting residential speed and volume of motor
11 Secure short, medium or areas and facilities traffic
O Wide kerbside lanes Shared footway alternative to long term bicycle parking
narrow lanes at signals as required 15 Drainage culvert or road bridges 1s Parking showers and
O Bicycle/Parking lanes and/or busy road used as underpass for path lockers
1z Path to encourage dual
Standup lanes and advanced mode and connect to com- 16 Shared path in plantation High speed commuter path
zo
stoplines at signals munity facilities reserve in rail reservation
It is important that municipal or road authorities prepare facility (road or path) and in the case of roads, to deter-
plans illustrating ultimate route networks, and that these mine whether bicycle lanes or another form of road treat-
be disseminated to relevant organisations and sections ment is required.
thereof, to ensure the network is accommodated in future
development proposals. In particular, the flow chart identifies the circumstances
beyond which treatment is desirable.
2.4.1.2. Type of Facility Required The flow chart is an assessment of the primary factors
needed to determine the type of facility required. It is
The flow chart in Figure 2-4 is provided to assist design- acknowledged that other issues, constraints and practices
ers and road authorities to choose the appropriate type of will also have a bearing on the decision making process.
Is the route a e Refer Path Treatment

Strategic Bicycle primarily for Flowchart (sect. 6.6)
Route? recreation, or for
cycling to school'?
Is route used for

commuting by motor
traffic5?l Is motor
traffic volume
(AADT) greater than
30l0 vpd?
Is route used for

commuting by motor
trafW?l Is motor
traffic volume
(AADT) greater than
3.< vpd?
z
Where route follows

a road, is s
>-
limit greater than

10
80 krnlh?
Ensure satisfactory local

conditions including:
safety;
connectivity; and
routes to and around
schools and other bicycle trip
generators.
A detailed review should be

carried out:
of routes for inexperienced
cyclists;
for strategic bicycle routes; or
Figure 2-4: Guide to Choice of Type of Facility for Cyclists where high bicycle volumes
(See Notes on Page 10) exist.
Bicycle lane or path treatments

may be appropriate in these
circumstances6.
Consideration should be given

to the use of 'advisory' treat-
ments for the strategic bicycle
routes (see sect. 4.4.6.2).
10 BICYCLES
Notes (Figure 2-4): (a) Education Programs

1. The purpose of the question is to ascertain the likeli- Initiatives relating to the education of the community
hood of inexperienced cyclists using the route, for regarding cycling may include:
whom a higher level of protection is usually appropri-
ate. Therefore, if the route is used primarily by inex- bicycle education programs in primary schools;
perienced cyclists but not for recreation or travel to bicycle education programs in secondary schools
school, then it may still be appropriate to answer yes including development of on-road skills;
to this `test'.
courses for inexperienced adult cyclists;
2. The `tests' for motor traffic conditions are based on
traffic volumes as well as traffic speeds. An alterna-
development of a cyclist code of behaviour;
tive `test', to a specific traffic volume threshold is pro- on-going education of motorists and cyclists to better
vided, which is preferred by some authorities, i.e. ìs understand each others needs; and
route used for commuting by motor traffic?'. This
recognises that motor traffic commuting routes are media campaigns on critical issues.
often associated with aggressive traffic conditions.
Such conditions are a significant concern for vulnera- (b) Enforcement Programs
ble road users including cyclists. Bicycles are defined as vehicles under road traffic regula-
tions and cyclists are therefore required to comply with the
3. A traffic volume of 3000 motor vehicles per day is law. However, police involvement in cycling should be
widely regarded as the highest level beyond which more constructive than simply penalising offenders.
provision for cyclists should be made, in view of the Initiatives relating to enforcement may include:
level of the stress experienced by cyclists, and of road
safety concerns. It is also in accord with urban road seminars to educate police in the role they can play in
network planning criteria. bicycle strategies and plans to improve cycle safety;
on-going media promotion of laws, responsible and

4. There are occasions when the use of daily two-way
defensive riding, etc.;
traffic volumes is insufficient to define the road con-
ditions to which cyclists are exposed. For instance it promotion of safe cycling by personal contact with
may be appropriate to consider a `left lane traffic young and adolescent cyclists;
volume' of approximately 200 - 250 vehicles per hour
(rather than 3000 vehicles per day) in the case of development of police patrols on bicycles in inner city
multi lane roads, one way roads, and roads that expe- areas and on busy paths;
rience unusually high or low traffic peaks. It may also
be appropriate to use this criterion to determine the special promotional campaigns with rewards for safe
period of application of bicycle lanes that are subject cycling (e.g. raffle of cycling goods); and
to time limitations. a police in schools program as part of general traffic
safety education, including bicycle safety checks and
5. See Section 6.4.1 for characteristics of a successful basic road law.
commuting path.
(c) Encouragement Programs
The flow chart is not intended to discourage the pro-
vision of bicycle lanes including those in low volume,
A major objective of bicycle programs is to achieve
increased levels of community participation in cycling for
low speed local streets where they may be required as
both transportation and recreation. Initiatives to encourage
part of a strategic bicycle route or for young and inex-
cycling may include:
perienced cyclists.
on-going promotion of the environmental, recreational
and health benefits of cycling to the individual and
2.4.2. Behavioural Aspects Programs community;
Bicycle programs will include consideration of many promotion of the opportunities of using the bicycle for
issues relating to the behaviour of cyclists, their safe use recreation, tourism, commuting, social and practical
of the transport network, and the encouragement of purposes;
cycling. Sub-programs should be developed to address
these issues and initiatives that might be taken are listed development of systems, fare structures and other con-
below. Whilst many of the initiatives are inter-related, for ditions to make multi-modal travel (e.g. bicycle/train)
convenience they are divided into Education, Enforcement an attractive alternative to the motor car for appropri-
and Encouragement. ate trips (sect. 2.5);
individualised marketing campaigns such as travel transport travellers frequently pass and a reasonable level
demand management programs; of security lighting exists. Access to stations should be via
ramps, not stairs, to enable ease of access for bicycles and
the organisation of special bicycle rides and other wheel chairs.
events such as national conferences;
To be successful, multi mode travel also requires promo-
provision of a comprehensive set of education pro-
tion through advertisement on public transport station bul-
grams;
letin boards and in local papers.
development of comprehensive engineering programs
Local Government, State and Federal Road Authorities
to provide networks, continuous routes, safer and
also have a role to play in promoting multi mode by ensur-
smoother roads and paths;
ing that bicycle routes to railway stations, airports, ferry
provision of adequate ènd of trip' facilities such as terminals, bus terminals and tram terminals are safe, con-
showers and secure parking; and venient and clearly marked.
provision of information, maps and signs to guide

cyclists to appropriate routes and facilities. 2.6. Integrated Land Use/Bicycle
Planning
2.5. Combining Bicycle Travel with The development of new urban areas and the renewal of
Public Transport existing urban areas provide excellent opportunities to
facilitate bicycle transport. Land uses should be organised
A large percentage of the population of cities reside and so that precincts for schools, shopping, housing, commer-
work within easy cycling distance of railway stations or cial and industrial purposes are served by a network of
other major transport interchanges. Multi mode travel, through roads, collector roads, local streets and paths, any
where people are encouraged to combine bicycle travel number of which may be used for a single trip by bicycle.
with public transport thereby increasing the range of bicy- The design of the area should take into account the
cle travel, has significant potential. This is clearly illus- requirements of any proposed Principal Bicycle Network.
trated in Figure 2-5 which shows a plot of the penetration
that combined bicycle/train travel has in Melbourne The urban planning of each precinct should provide a very
assuming relatively short rides of only 7.5 minutes to and good level of accessibility to cyclists travelling in any
from the railway stations. direction by providing connections to the road network
and path systems at frequent intervals. Such a design will
It is in the interest of Public Transport Authorities to sup- provide direct and safe routes for both long distance com-
port multi mode travel (e.g. bicycles in combination with muter trips and short local trips. Paths through reserves
buses, ferries, trains, trams, light rail vehicles) because it (open spaces) which link common cycling destinations
enables longer cross town trips to be achieved using bicy- such as schools and shops with housing allow young and
cles and should assist in increasing public transport inexperienced cyclists to avoid busy main roads.
patronage. The package of measures adopted by these Consideration should be given to providing priority to
authorities may enable bicycles to be carried free of path users at the path intersections with low volume local
charge on public transport vehicles at all possible times roads. Railway stations and other public transport termi-
and perhaps the provision of special bicycle storage facil- nals should also be fed by paths and bicycle routes on
ities on trains or buses. local roads to encourage multi-modal travel.
If multi mode cycling is to be encouraged it is paramount The major physical elements required to make an
that all railway stations and transport terminals should be urban area supportive of travel by bicycle are shown in
provided with secure bicycle parking. Secure, long term, Figure 2-3.
weatherproof bicycle parking, namely lockers (Sect.
10.3.5(a)), should be provided for those patrons who wish
to use a bicycle at one end of the multi mode trip. The Perth 2.7. The Development and Evaluation
Better Public Transport Plan (1998) highlights the need for of Bicycle Programs
coin operated lockers, for casual but secure parking, in
Bicycle programs should generally emanate from a State
addition to traditional long term rental schemes for lockers.
bicycle strategy or from a local strategic bicycle plan
Bicycle parking rails (sect. 10.3.5(c)) are also necessary although they may also result from community concern!
for bicycle riding patrons who wish to use public transport about specific issues.
for a few hours and avoid paying for a locker. Parking rails
are also useful for spill over parking in times of heavy In developing programs it is most important to base then
on the best possible information. Programs may be gener
demand for special events such as sporting matches.
al or be aimed at specific bicycle user groups or aspects c
Bicycle parking should preferably be in view of station cycling. Depending on the type of program, informatio
attendants but at least should be in an area where public might be obtained from:
12 BICYCLES
RP.SPr
Etfham
Cobcg
Essen
Heidelberg
Jewell
Clifton H
Boybrok
Oaklands
Junction
MELBOURNE
Yarra
Hart*
High
lwl: -.15.
Map showing how far cyclists and walkers 'Cheltenham
can go in 7 1/2 minutes from railway station.

Fit people and geared bikes.
Circles drawn are approximate only, see catchment area diagram. Dandonon
-a Cycling at 20 km/h
71/2 minutes for 2.5km.
24 km
N
5 kilometres
E
a)
E
0
c Walking at 6.5 km/h Chelsea
!.1 TO FRANKSTON
71/2 minutes for 0.8km.
Courtesy of Alan Parker Desic
- Boundary line of existing residential development in 1992.
Figure 2-5: Potential of Bicycle/Train Multi Mode Travel in Melbourne

government census - in some instances care is required to bicycle safety audit processes (Appendix A). This will
when using data obtained through the census in rela- involve:
tion to cycling, as this is carried out in August when
cycling is at a low level and weather conditions are measurement of use, throughout the implementation
quite poor, in many population centres; process of facilities and programs;
identification of problems;
specific studies and surveys;
implementation of solutions to those problems; and
crash statistics and hospital admission records;
consultation with local bicycle groups.
local bicycle groups;
The lessons learned and information gained should then be
counts of bicycle traffic - these may be obtained from communicated to those involved in planning and design
observational surveys or using electronic traffic survey with respect to bicycles and cycling. Many programs will
equipment; or have to be evaluated in reference to program objectives
whilst physical network improvements may be evaluated
existing programs. in relation to use and compliance with various standards
A count at one or more locations will often provide good and good practice.
information about the use of a particular facility. However,
where facilities do not exist or where behavioural issues 2.8. Bicycle Planners
are involved, surveys may be necessary (e.g. interviews or
Planners, engineers and designers of bicycle facilities
questionnaires at schools, shopping centres, work places

or at the roadside) to gain an understanding of bicycle should be familiar with, and have experience in the provi-
usage and/or cyclist behaviour. sion of integrated bicycle, pedestrian and public transport
initiatives, through formal education processes and on the
Continuous improvement in the quality of bicycle pro- job training. They should be versed in the particular diffi-
grams, projects and facilities delivered to the community culties encountered when undertaking work in this area as
requires that existing programs, projects and facilities are poor infrastructure and inadequate programs, will result in
monitored and evaluated, and where appropriate subjected failure to achieve strategic objectives.
Figure 2-6: Down Loading Data from a Bicycle Counter

14 BICYCLES
3 Bicycle Rider Requirements
3.1. General 3.3. Smooth Surface

In relation to path and road engineering all cyclists have Many bicycles have narrow tyres inflated to high pressure
five basic requirements whenever they ride: to reduce drag and have no suspension system. A smooth
(albeit skid resistant) surface is therefore desirable for
Space To Ride; bicycles to be used effectively, comfortably and safely.
Surfaces used for cycling should desirably be smoother
A Smooth Surface;
than those acceptable for motor vehicles and persons
Speed Maintenance; responsible for road and path construction and mainte-
nance should be made aware of this requirement. Detailed
Connectivity; and advice on surface tolerances is provided in Section 8.5.1.
Information. Bovy and Bradley (1985) found that surface quality and
trip length were about equal and both were twice as impor-
These requirements apply equally on roads and on paths. tant to cyclists as traffic volumes and the availability of
bicycle facilities in cyclists' route choice.
By implication the important objective of a safe environ-
ment for cyclists must exist, given the provision of space
to ride, a smooth surface and the ability of cyclists to 3.4. Speed Maintenance
maintain their speed.
For bicycles to be most effective as a means of transport
cyclists must be able to maintain speed without having to
3.2. Space to Ride slow or stop often. Cyclists typically travel at speeds
between 20 km/h and 30 km/h although they may reach in
The bicycle design envelope and clearances shown in excess of 50 km/h down hills. Once slowed or stopped it
Figure 3-1 provides the basis for the design of the bicycle takes considerable time and effort to regain the desired
facilities described in later sections of this document. It is operating speed.
important for designers to understand the basis of the
design including clearance requirements so that they can Bicycle routes, especially off-road, should be designed for
make judgements in difficult situations where a knowl- continuous riding, minimising the need to slow or stop for
edge of minimum space requirements is needed. The enve- any reason including steep gradients, rough surfaces, sharp
lope is relevant to the design of lanes on roads, off-road corners, obscured sight lines, intersections, or to give way
paths and bicycle parking facilities. to other people because the width available is too narrow.
On many roads cyclists are confined to the extreme left
The 1.0 metre wide envelope allows for the width of a hand side by motor vehicles and a rough surface prevents
bicycle and for variations in tracking. Not all bicycle cyclists from maintaining an acceptable speed.
riders can steer a straight line and when riding up-hill
experienced riders work the bicycle from side to side
whilst the inexperienced may wobble. Bicycle riders also
3.5. Connectivity
need adequate clearances to fixed objects and to passing Connectivity is that quality of a bicycle route or route net-
vehicles in addition to the 1.0 metre envelope. work, describing the continuous nature of facilities or of
the continuous nature of desired conditions.
In some situations it may be appropriate to provide for
alternative forms of pedal cycles in the design of facilities. Cyclists need to be able to undertake and complete mean-
With reference to Appendix C, operational characteristics ingful trips by bicycle. For recreation it may be from a res-
and advice on the means of designing for `human powered idential area to a picnic spot, for a specific purpose trip
vehicles' (HPV's) are provided in the event that a route or from home to work or the shops. Bicycle routes compris-
facility is anticipated to be used by a large number of these ing roads and paths should combine to form an effective,
vehicles. convenient and safe network.
In general the least manoeuvrable HPV served by these Connectivity is an important aspect of the construction of
guidelines is a tandem bicycle. effective bicycle routes. Before a route is constructed the
BICYCLE RIDER REQUIREMENTS 15
I - See Sectoo 6.*4.5 for es to tree cod other " s

2 - See sftt;m 7.6.2 far pmk$"06 measumes w /froth OWAW toIs owoy from road
Figure 3-1: Bicycle Operating Space
purpose of the route should be identified as well as the 3.6. Information

routes which cyclists are likely to use in travelling to and
from the paths, bicycle lanes and roads forming the net- Bicycle routes should be signposted to indicate both desti-
work. nations and the distances to them.
Maps should be available showing the route, facilities and

A route for cyclists which starts and ends abruptly is points of interest along it, its relationship to the
undesirable and may be hazardous as it may lure inexpe- surrounding road system, and its relationship to relevant
rienced cyclists to a point where they are at risk, perhaps community facilities. The map and the signposting should
having to ride along or across busy roads to complete be consistent in terms of destination names and other
their intended trip. information.
16 BICYCLES
4 Roads
4.1. General where a steep gradient is unavoidable additional pavement

width should be provided to allow for this operating char-
Provision for cyclists on roads should be considered in all acteristic.
aspects of road management including:
Because excessive gradients on hills can be unpleasant to
choice of cross section for all roads during the design cyclists and act as a deterrent to bicycle riding, road plan-
process;
ners and designers should strive to minimise gradients on
development of traffic management programs; all new works including those in new subdivisions. It may
be possible to achieve flatter grades on important collector
road safety audits (see Appendix A); and roads for little additional cost.
maintenance programs where opportunities exist to Further details on gradients for cyclists are provided in
provide space for cyclists by altering lane markings. Section 6.3.6.
In local streets it is usually not necessary to make special

provision for cyclists as the lower speed of motor traffic 4.2.3. Cross Section & Clearances
should enable cyclists to safely share the road with other
users. On arterial roads and collector streets it is usually On roads carrying less than 3000 vehicles per day bicycle
necessary to ensure that adequate space exists for cyclists riders and motor vehicles can generally share the road
to share the road safely and comfortably, particularly space. However, where this volume is exceeded and where
when the road forms part of a Principal or Regional speeds are high, motor vehicles will constantly pass bicy-
Bicycle network. It is often possible to reduce the widths cle riders and hence the width of the left hand lane should
of other lanes in order to allocate additional space to the be at least sufficient for cars and bicycles to travel safely
left hand lane for joint use by cyclists. side by side. This requirement applies equally along roads
and at intersections.
Depending on the nature of the road, abutting land use, the
function of the road in bicycle networks, and the number AUSTROADS Guide To Traffic Engineering Practice -
of cyclists using the road, provision of the special on road Parts 2 and 5 should be consulted in determining appropri-
facilities described in this chapter may be appropriate. ate lane widths to cater for motor vehicles and in assessing
whether inner lanes can be narrowed and kerbside lanes
The facilities described in this chapter are those applied widened to better provide for cyclists. In establishing the
within the carriageway of new roads or within the estab- minimum width required for the inner lanes, traffic speeds,
lished road carriageway in the case of existing roads. the number of large vehicles and the road alignment must
be taken into account. In congested urban areas, 3.0 metres
4.2. Road Design Criteria for Cyclists is generally accepted as the absolute minimum lane width
at mid-block locations (3.3 metres desirable) and 2.7
4.2.1. Road Geometry metres at intersections (3.0 metres desirable).
Most bicycle riding is done on roads. The vertical and hor- Due to the side `wind' force exerted on bicycle riders from
izontal alignment standard adopted on roads to serve the heavy vehicles, roads should be designed to provide satis-
needs of motor traffic will normally be satisfactory for factory clearances between the bicycle envelope and the
bicycle riding provided the operational aspects of cycling vehicle. At motor vehicle speeds of 60, 80 and 100 km/h
are understood by road authorities, engineers, planners clearances between the cyclist envelope and an adjacent
and designers. truck of 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 metres respectively should be pro-
vided to enhance cyclist safety (see Figure 3-1). Wider clear-
4.2.2. Gradients ances may be appropriate for speeds in excess of 100 km/h.
Whilst motor vehicles have little difficulty climbing most Similar clearances to cars should be provided in order that
hills bicycle riders prefer to avoid hills wherever possible. cyclists do not feel unduly threatened by general motor
They normally select the flattest alternative route to min- traffic. However, the inability to achieve these clearances
imise the amount of climbing. In climbing steep hills should not preclude the provision of a facility having a
experienced cyclists work the bicycle from side to side lesser clearance unless a suitable alternative route or means
whilst the inexperienced tend to wobble. In situations of accommodating cyclists exists within the road reserve.
ROADS 17
In most instances, a range of treatment widths have been with a speed limit in excess of 70 - 80 km/h, given the 85`"
provided in the sections below. The following factors percentile speed of cyclists under free flow conditions is in
should be the subject of careful assessment when choosing the order of 30 km/h (Shepherd, 1994).
the actual lane or treatment widths:
Similarly, where hills exist, the lower speed differential
parking conditions; between motor and bicycle traffic for downhill travel, and
motor vehicle speed; the `wobble' effect for uphill travel (sect. 4.2.2), are such
motor vehicle volume; that it may be appropriate to provide a bicycle lane treat-
bicycle/parking lane width; ment in the uphill direction only, where width constraints
bicycle volume; exist and there is no opportunity for the provision of a
car lane width; bicycle lane in the downhill direction.
percentage of heavy vehicles; and
alignment of road. 4.2.6. Public Lighting
Consultation should also occur with the State Road Public lighting is important in all of the environments used
Authority and the relevant organisations representing by cyclists, particularly roads, due to the relatively incon-
cyclists regarding the provisions of the facilities. spicuous form of cyclists and as a vulnerable road user in
terms of general road safety and personal security. As such
The demand for the adjoining motor traffic lanes is also an
there is some justification for high levels of lighting along
important issue in assessing the adequacy of bicycle lanes.
strategic bicycle road routes. Such routes should at least be
Where a road is operating close to capacity and narrow
illuminated in accordance with the relevant standards for
bicycle lanes exist, there may be insufficient opportunities,

roadway lighting (e.g. AUSTROADS Part 12).
or it may be hazardous, for cyclists to pass each other.
Therefore, if a demand for passing within bicycle lanes is
likely in peak hours a minimum bicycle lane width of 2.0
metres should be provided along congested roads. 4.3. Provision for Cyclists
4.2.4. Capacity 4.3.1. General
Whilst not a common problem, the capacity of bicycle Traffic lanes for cyclists should be viewed as part of a
lanes may need to be considered in a few instances. The bicycle network providing the connectivity required to
information provided in Section 6.3.3 is also applicable to enhance the convenience and safety of trips by bicycle.
bicycle lanes on roads. Surface conditions and edge clear- The flow chart in Figure 4-1 is a basic guide to assist
ances to kerbs need to be considered in the assessment of designers and road authorities to choose the appropriate
the capacity of road lanes for bicycles. type of lane or other road treatment for cyclists.
4.2.5. Speed Issues The flow chart only considers the primary factors needed
to determine the type of treatment required. As for the
As vulnerable road users, the issue of speed limits on associated guide charts in this document (refer Figure 2-4
roads is important to cyclists. In addition to significant and and Figure 6-15), there are other issues, constraints and
widely acknowledged improvements in community safety practices that will have a bearing on the decision making
and amenity, negligible travel time cost increases and process. It is acknowledged that urban planning strategies,
reduced motor traffic noise and exhaust emissions (AUS- financial, commercial and political considerations, and
TROADS, 1996), there are potential benefits for road hybrid treatment options (e.g. asymmetric road cross-sec-
authorities in the provision of bicycle facilities. tional choices, see sect. 4.3.2(b)) will influence the final
choice of treatment for a given road or locality.
The guides for the provision of facilities provided in
Figure 2-4 and Figure 4-1 are based on typical conditions The flow chart should be read in conjunction with the
and considerations. However, where lower traffic speeds following notes.
exist, the need for treatment or for wider clearances (sect.
4.2.3), is reduced. Notes (Figure 4-1):
Where the difference between bicycle and motor traffic 1. In general the treatments are arranged around the
speeds is less than 20 km/h, full integration may be accept- desired preferences for treatment (Exclusive Bicycle
able, i.e. where bicycles and motor traffic share the road Lane highest priority). The order of preference may
without any special provisions. Conversely, segregation is vary locally or on a regional basis.
most desirable where the difference between bicycle and
2. See Section 4.3.2, and the respective sections on the
motor traffic speeds exceeds 40 km/h (Godefrooij, 1992).
construction requirements for individual lane facilities
On this basis it is preferable that wide kerbside lane treat- (also referred to in the figure), for advice on obtaining
ments (sect. 4.4.7) are avoided where possible along roads space to implement the particular facility.
18 BICYCLES
Is road a section of a
Strategic Bicycle Route'
Is demand for parking exclusive bicycle Exclusive Bicycle Lane(s)

on road low?/ Are full- lane(s) be provided (sect. 4.4.1)
time parking restrictions physical
attainable? constraints of the situ?
Provide space on-road

eg. Seal Shoulder(s)
(sect. 4.4.4)3, or develop
alternative route
Bicycle /Car Parking

Lane(s) (sect. 4.4.2) or:
Edge Line Treatment (sec
4.4.6.1)
Can ex Part Time Exclusive Bicycle

lane(s) be provided Lane(s) 4 (sect. 4 . 4. 1 )
given the physical
constraints of the situ?
V
f Wide Kerbside Lane(s)
Can wide kerbside
on road low?/ Are full- lane(s) be provided (sect. 4.4.7)
time parking restriction given the physical
attainable? constraints of the sit
Can wide kerbside Part Time Wide Kerbside

lane(s) be provided Lane (s)4 (sect. 4.4.7)
given the physical
constraints of the situ?
Mark widest lane

possible5,6 and develop
I alternative route.
Ensure satisfactory local conditions

including.
Safety,
Connectivity;
Routes to schools; and
Bicycle trip generators, etc
Figure 4-1: Guide to Choice of Road Treatment for Cyclists

(See Notes on pages 17 & 19)
ROADS 19
Notes (Figure 4-1, cont.) lanes along it to promote a safe and convenient route
between suburbs and/or community facilities.
3. The option for shoulder sealing is located in a conve-
nient position in the chart and is not listed by order of Conversely, where a local street forms part of a bicycle route
preference. In general, this option is applicable to rural it may not be necessary for cyclists, or desirable in terms of
roads where motor traffic speeds are high, bicycle vol- the visual amenity of the street, to mark bicycle lanes.
umes are low and the expense of a separate (i.e. from
In considering the width that can be made available for a
the road) path treatment is unlikely to be warranted.
bicycle lane, it is essential to consider also the width that
is or may be required for all other road user groups.
4. In utilising part time treatments, care is required to
ensure reasonable conditions exist for cycling outside
of the periods when these treatments are in operation 4.3.2. Finding Space for Treatment
(also see sect. 4.4.1).
Having determined that bicycle lanes or another form of
provision for cyclists is required along a road, it is neces-
5. The shared use of the kerbside lanes of roads in 80
sary to implement those treatments in circumstances
km/h (or higher) speed zones is relatively stressful for
where space is often limited, the demands for the use of
many cyclists. However it is often not possible to pro-
that space is high, or where the cost to utilise any available
vide marked lanes or a left lane of a satisfactory width. space is high.
In these instances, regardless of whether an alternative
route can be identified and developed, it is essential to
Bicycle Victoria (1996) provides detailed guidance on

maximise the left lane width. In 60 km/h speed zones, techniques used to obtain space in road reserves for the
many cyclists would prefer to avoid kerb lane widths provision of cyclists' facilities. These are generally associ-
between 3.0 to 3.7 metres (Loder and Bayly, 1989). ated with existing roads and include the following:
6. Careful assessment of roads is required in addition to (a) Rearrangement of Space

marking the widest possible lane. Additional measures
by the adjustment of existing carriageway lane posi-
should be considered including:
tions or widths;
the provision of the highest quality surface within upgrading service roads so that they are suitable for
1.5 metres of the kerb; cyclists; and
sealing road shoulders.
fully mountable kerb sections where èscape' from
the carriageway could be necessary; and
(b) 'Fading Space
separated one-way paths at the roadside verge through indented car parking;
(sect. 6.6.2.2). road widening at the verge;
The Chart provided in Figure 4-1 relates to the more com- by restricting car parking to one side of a road result-
monly used treatments only, where a choice often exists. ing in an asymmetric road layout. Whereas this prac-
Other treatments are referred to in this chapter and may be tice is used in normal circumstances, additional oppor-
appropriate depending on the circumstances. A Contra- tunities sometimes exist where on one side of the road
Flow Bicycle Lane (sect. 4.4.3) is applicable to one-way car parking restrictions exist, or the car parking
demand is low;
streets only. Protected Lanes (sect. 4.4.5) would normally
be used in special circumstances only. road widening at the median;
removing a traffic lane, where excess road capacity
No `test' has been applied to determine whether or not part exists, or a reduction in the road demand occurs or to
time parking restrictions are attainable. These are effec- achieve a traffic calming objective; and
tively `lowest preference' options where treatment is rec-
ommended under Figure 2-4, and accordingly represent closing a road e.g. Swanston Walk in Melbourne.
the minimum level of provision that should be provided
(c) Alternative Space
for the comfort and safety of cyclists.
In some instances an alternative off-road route may attract
In rural towns this assessment should recognise the intend- road cyclists if it is constructed in close proximity to a
ed function of a route within the town. For example, road, has a high standard of geometric design, construc-
although the road may carry little traffic and be essential- tion and maintenance, and a similar travel distance to the
ly local in function, it may be desirable to define bicycle road route.
20 BICYCLES
4.4. Road Treatments for Cyclists Exclusive bicycle lanes should be constructed in accor-
dance with the details shown in Table 4-1, and the associ-
4.4.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes ated facility layout shown in Figure 4-3.
Description and Purpose The width adopted for exclusive bicycle lanes will vary
depending on the number of cyclists, the speed of motor
An exclusive bicycle lane is a lane created by pavement traffic, the volume of large vehicles and the ability to make
marking and signs. It is the preferred treatment for cyclists space available given the needs of other road user groups,
on roads. In general it is located at the left side of a road. physical constraints and budgetary constraints.
An example of an exclusive bicycle lane is shown in
Figure 4-2. However, the following provides a guide:
In general, motor traffic is prohibited by traffic regulations 3.0 metres is the absolute maximum width and is desir-
from travelling in the lane except to access property or to able where the adjacent motor traffic is moving at high
turn at intersections. Similarly parking in the lane is pro- speed (e.g. 100 km/h) and large vehicles are a signifi-
hibited either full time or otherwise during the designated cant proportion of the traffic stream or where demand
periods of operation of the lane. for cycling is so great that this width is required on
An exclusive bicycle lane may be appropriate where: operational grounds. This is the desirable width
required to enable cyclists to overtake each other with
bicycle traffic is concentrated, e.g. near schools or sufficient clearance to the adjacent traffic lane;
along major routes near city or town centres;
at least 2.0 metres is desirable where the adjacent

an existing or potential significant demand for bicycle motor traffic is moving at high speed (e.g. 100 km/h)
travel can be demonstrated, e.g. where traffic volumes and there are few large vehicles or where speeds are
and speeds deter cyclists from using an otherwise moderate (e.g. 80 km/h) and the volume of large vehi-
favourable route; cles is substantial. This is the minimum width that will
it is needed to provide continuity within a bicycle route enable cyclists to overtake each other without
network; and encroaching into the adjacent traffic lane;
a road is carrying or is likely to carry more than 3000 1.5 metres is the desirable width to be used along the
vehicles per day and/or a significant percentage of length of a lane, in a 60 km/h speed zone;
heavy vehicles.
1.2 metres is the absolute minimum width to be used
along the length of a lane and should only be used
where the provision of a wider lane is impracticable, in
a 60 km/h speed zone;
1.0 metre width is permissible only in special circum-

stances where an otherwise wider lane passes through
a `squeeze point', which may be an intersection (e.g. S
lane treatment) or traffic management treatment, and it
is not possible to achieve a wider bicycle lane. A 1.0
metre width may also be acceptable where the speed
environment is less than 60 km/h and space is severe-
ly restricted; and
The upper limit of the acceptable range for each road

speed is limited to a lane width in which motor traffic
Figure 4-2: Exclusive Bicycle Lane (Hawthorn, SA) is unlikely to travel.
Application Details Lane Width (in)
An exclusive bicycle lane may be provided where parking R 60 so 10

is banned, where the demand for kerbside car parking is
minimal or where the facility is mainly required in peak
periods and parking is allowed in the off peak period. In
1"W 1.5 2.0
Acceptable Range 1.2-2.5 .5-2.7 2.0-3.0

the latter case supplementary sign plates should be pro- 1
vided to state the limited times of operation of the facility Table 4-1: Exclusive Bicycle Lane & Sealed
(refer Figure 9-1). Shoulder Dimensions (See Notes on page 21)
ROADS 21
.
Traffic ton*)
later we $cycle Tram' Lane(s)

at ktt is
L-M
Figure 4-3: Exclusive Bicycle Lanes - Layout
Notes (applicable to Table 4-1): peak travel demands of cyclists and motor vehicles
(e.g. clearway times, school travel hours -also see sect.
1. The posted or general speed limit is used, unless 85th 2.4.1.2). When cyclist demand is mainly in peak peri-
percentile speed is known and is significantly higher. ods and parking is required throughout the day the
2. Interpolation for different speed limits is acceptable. exclusive lane and adjacent traffic lane can provide an
appropriate width for the lane to act as a bicycle/park-
3. The width of the lane is normally measured from the ing lane;
face of the adjacent left hand kerb. The width of road
gutters/channels (comprising a different surface are of considerable advantage on long uphill grades
medium) should be less than 0.4m where minimum where there is a higher speed differential between
dimensions are used. The figures in the table presume motor vehicles and cyclists and cyclists tend to weave
that surface conditions are to be of the highest stan- about whilst working their way uphill; and
dard. Where there are poor surface conditions (see are also advantageous on long downhill grades where
sect. 8.5.1) over a section of road adjacent to the gutter, extra room to manoeuvre is desirable.
then the width of the Exclusive Bicycle Lane should be
measured from the outside edge of that section. `Peak Period' Exclusive Bicycle Lanes
It may be appropriate for designers to give consideration `Peak period' exclusive bicycle lanes are common on
to the interaction of cyclists with adjacent traffic, in vary- roads designated with Clearways. The restriction of park-
ing speed environments or where unusual circumstances ing during peak traffic periods usually coincides with peak
exist. The details provided in Figure 4-4 can be used as a cyclist numbers. On roads where the adjoining land use is
basis to assist calculations for the facility width under such predominantly residential, the installation of bicycle lanes
circumstances. during peak periods can be a compromise between the
adjoining residents' desire for on-street parking and
Other important aspects relating to exclusive bicycle lanes cyclists' need for designated road space. The timing of the
are that they: parking restrictions to coincide with local secondary
should be provided on both sides of the road where school opening and closure times has the additional
possible so that use is in the same direction as motor advantage of providing a separate cycling facility for
vehicle traffic; school children.
should not be placed between the kerb and parked cars After the installation of peak period exclusive bicycle
as there is no escape for cyclists should a car door be lanes it has been observed that residents and their visitors
opened suddenly; are more likely to utilise private driveways for parking and
as a consequence there is a marked reduction in the inci-
should only be used where there is little demand for dence of kerbside parking during all periods. Hence peak
parking throughout the day or where parking can be period, exclusive bicycle lanes can be advantageous to
prohibited during certain designated hours to suit the cyclists outside of peak traffic periods.
22
BICYCLES
Figure 4-4: Vehicle Positions on Road Carriageway associated with Exclusive Bicycle Lanes
ROADS 23
Peak period bicycle lanes should only be used when no

other option is possible. Often the carriageway layout is
such that during off-peak periods, cyclists have to contend
with stressful and potentially hazardous conditions when
cars are parked at the kerbside. It is important in the design
of the bicycle lane that conditions for cyclists are assessed
for different periods of the day.
4.4.2. Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes

4.4.2.1. With Parallel Parking
Description and Purpose
Installation of a bicycle/car parking lane (refer Figure 4-5) Figure 4-5: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane (Thebarton, S.A.)
provides a means of improving conditions for cyclists
where parking occurs. Such a lane should enable a cyclist In general, motor traffic is prohibited by traffic regulations
to ride with adequate clearance to moving vehicles in the from either travelling or parking in the bicycle lane section
adjacent traffic lane and also to avoid an opening door of a of the facility except to access property, to turn at inter-
parked car without having to enter the adjacent traffic lane. sections, to park, and the like.
The presence of parked cars puts cyclists under additional Application Details
stress as they must constantly search for car occupants to
assess whether a door is likely to be opened into their path. A bicycle/car parking lane is created by pavement mark-
Collisions between cyclists and opening doors of parked ings, which allocate space for cycling and for car parking,
cars are a significant concern to cyclists. Such incidents and by signs which give the lane its legal status.
should be an equal concern for car occupants in view of
Bicycle/car parking lanes should be constructed in accor-
their duty of care obligations.
Bicycle/car parking lanes may provide safety and other ated facility layout shown in Figure 4-6.
benefits for other road users, due to: Also:
improved clearances for parking and un-parking 4.5 metres is the acceptable maximum width as a
manoeuvres, and for the entering and exiting of parked greater width may result in moving cars attempting to
vehicles by drivers; utilise the bicycle lane. It provides acceptable clear-
ances in cases where parking turnover is significant or
more efficient use of the road-space on which they are
traffic speeds are in excess of 60 km/h but less than 80
implemented;
km/h;
reduced effective motor traffic lane crossing distance 4.2 metres is the desirable width where speeds are
for pedestrians; and about 60 km/h as it provides comfortable clearance to
parked cars;
improved channelisation of traffic and hence more
orderly and predictable traffic flow, and often better 4.0 metres is the acceptable minimum width where
sight conditions. traffic speeds are about 60 km/h as it enables a cyclist
to travel adjacent to parked and moving cars at a rea-
Bicycle/car parking lanes are most appropriate where the
sonable speed with minimum clearances; and
street is wide, there is a demand for parking (and where
road space and capacity requirements allow parking 3.7 metres is the absolute minimum width as this
throughout the day. They may be achieved by reducing the requires cyclists to ride close to the adjacent traffic
widths of other traffic lanes where space is available on lane in order to avoid a potential collision with a car
existing roads. A bicycle/car parking lane should not be door. This is in accord with the research by Loder and
provided where parking demand is low or subject to `no Bayly (sect. 4.4.7). This width is only acceptable
standing' restrictions during some periods, unless kerbed where the mean traffic speed is no more than about 50
projections are built to prevent the use of the lane by km/h, most parked vehicles are cars, parking turnover
through motor traffic. is low or space is limited.
24 BICYCLES
'
Car pwki s/ to
occardar With AS1742.11 -^-
k
at
t S
("WO
a
Traffic L
100 mm *We'Unbr Line e
Figure 4-6: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane (Parallel Parking) - Layout
It may be appropriate for designers to give consideration

Overall Facility Width'
to the interaction of cyclists with adjacent traffic, in vary-
Road Speed' (knVh) 60 8o ing speed environments or where unusual circumstances
exist. The details provided in Figure 4-7 can be used as a
4.0 4.5 basis to assist calculations for the facility width in such
circumstances.
Acceptable Range 3.7-4.5 4.0-4.7
Other
Table 4-2: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane Dimensions
(Parallel Parking) Other important aspects of bicycle/car parking lanes are:
Notes (Table 4-2): full integration of bicycles with other traffic may be
1. The posted or general speed limit is used, unless 85th preferable where parking turnover is high, through
percentile speed is known and is significantly higher. traffic speeds are low and the desirable minimum
widths cannot be achieved. Alternatively consideration
2. Interpolation for different speed limits is acceptable. could be given to an edge line treatment (sect. 4.4.6.1);
With reference to Figure 4-6, parking bays for the cars other than as described in section 4.4.6.1, a bicycle
should be marked at the minimum width of 2.1 metres. lane should not be provided between parked cars and
This is necessary where space is restricted to encourage the kerb, either in the case of parallel parking or angle
drivers to park very close to the kerb. parking;
Wider parking bays are appropriate where space is not if through motor traffic is likely to use the lane where
restricted (i.e. overall facility width in excess of 4.0m) or parking is light, the lane should be commenced with
where wide vehicles are the dominant type of vehicle some form of delineation to discourage traffic away from
using the parking bays. the area of the bicycle/car parking lanes. The delineation
may be comprised of a combination of pavement mark-
It can be seen that the minimum width required to achieve
ings and pavement bars, however raised kerb projections
acceptable bicycle/car parking lanes on a two way road,
similar to those shown in Figure 4-22 are considered to
assuming that 3.0 metre lanes are necessary for the central
be necessary where traffic volumes are high; and
traffic lanes, is 13.4 metres. However, many road reserva-
tions in cities are 20.0 metres wide with only 12.8 metres it is preferable to mark the parking bays or a line
between kerbs. Where such roads have relatively low traf- between parked cars and the edge line of the motor
fic volumes and very few trucks or buses, the best that may traffic lane in order to adequately define the space to be
be achieved in a 60 km/h speed zone for cyclists is to mark occupied by cyclists. Under some State regulations
3.5 metre wide bicycle/car parking lanes and 2.9 metre these markings are required.
central traffic lanes, without a safety strip, or alternatively
use an Edge Line treatment (sect. 4.4.6.1). In spite of the 4.4.2.2. With Angle Parking
restricted width it could be expected that cyclists will ben-
efit from motorists being alerted to the presence of cyclists. Description and Purpose
A safety strip is desirable where the overall facility width Bicycle/car parking lanes, associated with angle car park-
is in excess of 3.7m wide (sect. 9.6.1.2). A safety strip is ing spaces are relatively uncommon but have been used in
considered to be an important feature where the width of several States (refer Figure 4-8), with both a reverse-in and
the bicycle lane section exceeds 2.0 metres. reverse-out orientation.
ROADS
Figure 4-7: Vehicle Positions on Road Carriageway associated with Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes (Parallel Parking)
25
26 BICYCLES
The entry and exit conditions of angle parking requires

that a high level of protection be provided to cyclists. The
provision of marked bicycle lanes adjacent to angle park-
ing is therefore most desirable.
Whilst an opening car door does not pose a threat to

cyclists in the case of angle parking, cyclists have to be
alert to vehicles reversing (regardless of orientation) into
their path.
It is most important in cases where parallel parking is

being converted to angle parking that the needs of cyclists
are given adequate consideration. Go wat S
Figure 4-8: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane -

Angle Parking (Glenelg, SA)
The lanes serve as a regular reminder to drivers, high-

lighting the potential presence of cyclists. They also allow
cyclists to avoid parked cars which move back slightly to
improve visibility prior to departing from the car park.
There is a tendency for cyclists to travel too close to Figure 4-9: Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes (Angle Parking) - Layout
parked vehicles, and the lane facility promotes cycling in
a position that aids visibility between drivers and cyclists. Notes (applicable to Table 4-3):
In general, motor traffic is prohibited by traffic regulations
from either travelling or parking in the bicycle lane section 1. Measured from kerb face to centre-of-road-side line of
of the facility. bicycle lane. These dimensions assume parked cars
Application Details can overhang of the kerb. An additional 0.6 metres
should be added where overhanging of the kerb is not
Bicycle/car parking lanes, where angle parking exists, possible (i.e. parking to a wall).
should be constructed in accordance with the details shown
in Table 4-3, and the associated facility layout shown 2. This facility should be constructed where the speed
Figure 4-9. This treatment is appropriate only where the limit is 70 km/h or less, but in general would be inap-
posted or general speed limit is 60 to 70 km/h (or less). propriate where the 85th percentile speed is known to
be significantly higher.
The provision of kerbed projections or other treatments

45
including channelisation is recognised as extremely
7.3 7.6 important. They should be constructed immediately to the
left of the bicycle lanes at the start of this type of lane
7.»7.$ 7.4-.1 j 7.8-.5
facility and at regular intervals to limit the incidence of
Table 4-3: Bicycle/Car Parking Lane Dimensions (Angle Parking) vehicles travelling over, or to the left of, the bicycle lane
(See Notes) (sect. 4.5.2).
ROADS 27
A safety strip should be provided to limit the potential use Contra-flow bicycle lanes should be considered an accept-
of the bicycle lane section by moving vehicles, particular- able treatment in urban environments where sufficient
ly when the parking demand is minimal, and as clearance road width exists to provide a safe treatment. They may be
for drivers reversing from car parks (sect. 9.6.1.2). appropriate to achieve inner-city links, or routes to schools
along lightly trafficked service roads.
Whilst the dimensions listed in Table 4-3 account for the
principal requirements of relevant car parking standards, In general, as for exclusive bicycle lanes, motor traffic is
designers should ensure the requirements of such stan- prohibited by traffic regulations from either travelling or
dards are met in all respects, where it is proposed to install parking in contra-flow bicycle lanes.
a bicycle lane adjacent to the outside of angle car parking.
As for parallel bicycle/car parking lanes, car parking in the Application Details
bicycle lane section is not permitted and therefore a line
between the parking and bicycle lane sections is required. The treatment is signed and marked as for an exclusive
bicycle lane (sect. 4.4.1), as detailed in Figure 4-10.
There is a preference by some bicycle groups and practi- Without continuous physical separation from the adjacent
tioners for 45 degree parking in some instances as opposed traffic lane it is generally appropriate in speed zones up to
to 60 degrees, on the basis of visibility. 60 km/h only.
Parking Orientation The absolute minimum width of a contra-flow bicycle lane

The orientation of parked cars, i.e. 'reverse-in' as opposed is 1.5 metres. The desirable width is 1.8 metres. Otherwise
to 'reverse-out', requires careful consideration. the width of contra-flow bicycle lanes should be consistent
with the advice provided in Section 4.4.1.
With 'reverse-out' angle parking the major potential for
conflict occurs during the un-parking manoeuvre and Physical separation generally by a traffic island, of the
during this manoeuvre the cyclist and other through traffic contra-flow bicycle lane from motor traffic, is most impor-
has right of way. tant at intersections (refer Figure 5-5). Physical separation
or a safety strip may also be necessary continuously or at
With 'reverse-in' angle parking the major potential for frequent intervals along the length of the lane to provide
conflict occurs during the parking manoeuvre where the protection for cyclists, where there is a possibility of
reversing car will be holding up the traffic including encroachment into the contra-flow bicycle lane. The width
cyclists. This is similar to the conflict that occurs during of physical separation at mid-block locations will depend
parallel parking manoeuvres. on the speed and volume of motor traffic using the road.
Also, whilst motorists leaving 'reverse-in' bays may have
a better view of approaching cyclists, there may be a ten- In low speed urban environments the contra-flow lane
dency for motorists to leave the bays at excessive speed.
must at least be defined by a well maintained solid line
throughout its length.
In general there is support for the implementation of the
lanes regardless of the orientation of parked cars. As there Cyclists travelling in the same direction as motor traffic
are fewer examples of 'reverse-in' facilities, Road author- along a one-way road may be provided with a bicycle lane
ities should proceed with caution where these are to be or they may be expected to integrate with motor traffic,
installed. depending on the road space available, road conditions
and other demands on it (e.g. car parking). This aspect
4.4.3. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes should be assessed in accordance with Section 2.4.1.2.
Description and Purpose Road authorities must ensure that contra-flow bicycle
lanes are established in a manner that is satisfactory from
A contra-flow bicycle lane is an exclusive bicycle lane
a legal viewpoint.
deployed on one side (to the left of the opposing direction
of traffic flow) of a one way street serving cyclists travel-
Other
ling against what is otherwise the legal direction of travel.
Alternatively, the treatment could be described as enabling
Contra-flow bicycle lanes may be placed between parked
cyclists to travel in both directions in a one-way street.
cars and the kerb where bicycle access is important.
It is advantageous to cyclists from a network viewpoint to Although this is not ideal it may be satisfactory where
allow contra-flow bicycle traffic access in one-way streets. cyclists do not need to frequently leave or join the facility
Also, due to the inconvenience of choosing an alternative over its length and cycling speeds are low. In such cases it
route, cyclists sometimes travel along one-way streets is imperative to provide a 1.0 metre separator (preferably
against the legal direction of traffic flow. a raised median) to allow for vehicle overhang or opening
car doors.
28 BICYCLES
Troff Lane } toot" wift tktr

Figure 4-10: Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane - Layout
Where parking occurs on the `right side' of a one-way traf- painted on the shoulder to warn motorists of the likely
fic lane (with respect to the general legal direction of presence of cyclists and to suggest to cyclists that they
travel), a contra-flow bicycle lane may be provided should use the shoulder. Freeways are a special case and
between the right side parking and the traffic lane. With may require special advisory signs (sect. 4.6.3). If suffi-
reference to Section 9.6.1.2, a safety strip is important in cient cyclist demand exists the shoulder may be marked
this instance, to improve the sight lines to approaching
cyclists from drivers preparing to exit the car park space.
Contra-flow bicycle lanes should not be provided along

sealed shoulders of rural or outer urban roads without
physical separation.
4.4.4. Sealed Shoulders

Where a road is unkerbed and provision for cyclists is

required, a smooth sealed shoulder is the preferred treat-
ment (refer Figure 4-11). Sealed shoulders are often pro-
vided to reduce road edge maintenance and repair costs,
and improve safety for motorists, but cyclists also benefit. Figure 4-11: Sealed Shoulder (Richmond, NSW)
It has been demonstrated for rural arterial roads, that crash
rates for all traffic, decreases by approximately 20 per cent and signed as an exclusive bicycle lane so that the shoul-
per 1 metre increase in the seal width (McLean, 1997). der takes on the legal significance of such a lane under the
Although warrants do not exist specifically for the provi- traffic regulations.
sion of sealed shoulders for cyclists there are many Widths required for sealed shoulders for bicycle usage are the
instances on rural type roads where the sealing of shoul- same as those required for exclusive bicycle lanes (sect.
ders is justified specifically to make roads safer for 4.4.1) varying from an absolute minimum of 1.2 metres to 3.0
cycling. metres depending on the number of cyclists and the speed
Application Details and composition of motor traffic. Provision for cyclists
should be maintained through intersections, past driveways,
An edge line should always be marked between the shoul- and at those locations where the road is kerbed along lengths
der and the traffic lane. Bicycle pavement symbols may be of road otherwise treated with sealed shoulders.
ROADS 29
Some important aspects relating to the use of sealed shoul- parking demand is low in the area of the treatment, and
ders by cyclists are: as a consequence would be removed; or
each section of sealed shoulder should continue over a the road is wide such that parking is retained adjacent
significant distance, preferably in excess of 500 to (but outside of) the bicycle path area. In this instance
metres. It is undesirable to have intermittent short sec- the facility is regarded as appropriate only where the
tions sealed with cyclists being `squeezed' at the end of parking is `long term'.
each section;
In general, the regulations applying to exclusive bicycle
The ends of each sealed shoulder section of road paths, in relation to travelling or stopping in protected
should taper to the adjacent length of road. Road side lanes, by motor traffic, pedestrians and others, would also
furniture and other obstructions (e.g. drainage chan- be applicable.
nels and culverts) should be located well clear of the
pavement in these transition zones;
where a sealed shoulder is closed for maintenance ade-
quate advance warning of the closure should be pro-
vided to cyclists. This is especially important on free-
ways and other high speed roads. Consideration should
be given to providing a temporary side track for
cyclists or a detour via a reasonable alternative route
(see Appendix B);
an initial treatment could be to provide shoulder seal-

ing on vertical crests and tight horizontal curves of
two-lane, two-way roads where double lines prevent
motorists from allowing satisfactory clearance to
cyclists when overtaking;
the edge of the shoulder pavement should be flush with
the adjacent ground;
in some circumstances it may be preferable and cheap-

er to provide a path for cycling instead of paving and
sealing the shoulders on both sides of the road.
However such paths will only be suitable for com-
muter cyclists if they are direct, of considerable length
and have few intersections at which cyclists have to
give way; and
shoulders must not be used as contra-flow bicycle

lanes, without physical separation (e.g. sect. 4.4.5). Figure 4-12: Protected Two-Way Lane (Swansea, NSW)
Application Details
4.4.5. Protected Two-Way Lanes
The essential elements comprising the facility are illus-
Description and Purpose trated by Figure 4-13. It is signed and delineated as an
This is an exclusive bicycle path (sect. 6.6.3) installed on exclusive bicycle path (sect. 6.6.3). It is generally appro-
one side of a road carriageway (refer Figure 4-12). This priate that the (R8-1) signs are installed on the nature strip
treatment may be appropriate where: next to the bicycle path section to limit the possibility of
confusion for road traffic.
origins and destinations are on the same side of the
road and as such road crossings can be avoided; It is anticipated the treatment would be established on an
existing road pavement in most instances.
there is no choice other than for a treatment within the
road reserve in a length generally consisting of paths At bus stops, a hard stand area should be provided on the
and where the need for road crossings by cyclists can nature strip to enable and encourage bus service partons to
be avoided; wait out of the bicycle path section. In addition suitable
access for entry to buses is required. This may involve the
relatively few driveway crossings exist, particularly construction of a flat top hump across the Protected Lane so
where the route is used by children, to avoid 'ride-out' that partons can move across the lane when a bus arrives,
(Cross and Fisher, 1977); and with safety, and not have to step up from pavement level.
30 BICYCLES
Focft Wfth
1,11
per ExdusWe
MC AA
I
E
-I
Figure 4-13: Protected Two-Way Lane - Layout
4.4.6. Advisory Treatments

These are treatments to indicate or advise road users of the
potential presence of cyclists and of the location where
cyclists may be expected to ride on a road. They consist of
pavement markings and otherwise only warning and guide
signs, and as such have no regulatory function.
In overseas practice, such treatments have been associated

with broken lines, and in general with yellow pavement
markings, whilst locally solid lines and mainly white
pavement markings have been used. The use of yellow
pavement markings is in accord with that of yellow warn-
ing signs, but varied preferences for colour exist and there
is currently no provision for yellow in some road regula-
Figure 4-14: Advisory Treatment using Edge Lines
tions or codes of practice. It is therefore a matter for local (Norwood, SA)
authorities to determine the colour of markings used for
these treatments. Whilst solid or unbroken edge lines are
preferred, broken lines may be used. Whilst the treatment is generally used along relatively
narrow carriageways, any benefit resulting from this treat-
4.4.6.1. Using Edge Lines ment will be maximised if the dimensional requirements
are sought for bicycle/car parking lanes recommended in
this guide.
In some jurisdictions, bicycle/car parking lanes (sect. The treatment should only be used where constrained con-
4.4.2.1) are rarely used. Alternatively, the road
ditions exist, where alternative treatments are not avail-
carriageway width may be insufficient to accommodate able, or where alternative routes are either not available or
this treatment.
unlikely to be useful. It is generally not appropriate for
However, an edge line can be marked (refer Figure 4-14) new roads and arterial roads, where bicycle lane treat-
between the left motor traffic lane and parking lane. The ments are preferred.
purpose of the line is to encourage motor traffic to travel
Application Details
away from the left side of the road or from parked cars,
and thereby maximise the space available for the riding of The principal features of the treatment are shown in Figure
bicycles. 4-15.
ROADS 31
I L2m merit
2.1 - 2.m Pa
Figure 4-15: Advisory Treatment using Edge Lines - Layout
" Lk* / Lo"

911
so
to
9
Urn e
Pa"Men Sy
Figure 4-16: Advisory Treatment using Pavement Symbols - Layout
4.4.6.2. Using Pavement Symbols
Where the available road width is constrained and it is

desired to highlight a continuing route, bicycle pavement
symbols can be used, as detailed in Figure 4-16 and illus-
trated in Figure 4-17.
A consistent approach to the use of this treatment should

be adopted within a region or State. In some jurisdictions
it is being used to designate the locations where the
dimensional requirements of a wide kerbside lane are met
(see sect. 4.4.7).
4.4.7. Wide Kerbside Lanes

A wide kerbside lane (refer Figure 4-18) is a normal traf-

fic lane on the left side of the carriageway (of either a two
lane - two way road or multi-lane road) of sufficient width
to allow cyclists to travel beside the main traffic stream
and to permit motorists to overtake cyclists without having
to effectively change lanes. This sharing of lanes is gener-
ally appropriate in speed zones of 70 km/h or less.
The sharing of lanes cannot be legally performed (and Figure 4-17: Advisory Treatment using Pavement Symbols
hence facilitated) in all States. (Brighton, SA)
32 BICYCLES
Because special signs and other pavement markings are Table 4-4 indicates the acceptable widths in 60 km/h speed
not required, wide kerbside lanes are a very cost effective zones (unless noted otherwise) for wide kerbside lanes,
way of providing space for cyclists, particularly on arteri- which are summarised as follows:
al and sub-arterial roads where there is limited space avail-
able to meet the requirements of all road users, and where 3.7 metres is the absolute minimum width. This width
clearways apply during peak hours. They are often readily is only suitable in 60 km/h zones where the operating
achievable by replacing lane lines in a different location as speeds are generally less than the posted limit and a
a part of road marking maintenance operations and hence wider lane is not feasible. A 1.0 metre clearance
have potential for large scale usage. between the envelope of a cyclist and a passing car or
truck can only be achieved if these vehicles encroach
Wide kerbside lanes are appropriate on all major traffic into the adjacent traffic lane;
routes and collector streets, whether divided or undivided,
on sections of road where parking is either minimal or pro- 4.0 metres is the desirable minimum width providing a
hibited during peak periods. 1.0 metre clearance between a car or a large truck and
the cyclist envelope, it being assumed that cars remain
within the left lane and trucks encroach 0.6 metres into
the adjacent traffic lane;
a width of 4.2 metres is desirable as it enables an ade-

quate 1.0 metre clearance to a large truck having to
encroach only marginally into the adjacent traffic
lane; and
a width of 4.5 metres enables a truck to overtake a

cyclist within the lane at a clearance of about 1.0 metre
to the envelope. This width also enables adequate
clearances for truck speeds up to 80 km/h provided
that the truck encroaches into the adjacent traffic lane.
Other important aspects, also applicable in 60 km/h speed

zones, are as follows:
Figure 4-18: Wide Kerbside Lanes Created During Pavement
Marking Operations (Kew, Vic.) where kerbside parking is significant in the off peak
period a wide kerbside lane should be at least 4.0
Application Details metres wide so that the lane will function satisfactorily
as a bicycle/car parking lane during these periods even
A study of kerbside lanes (Loder and Bayly, 1989) indicat- though special pavement marking is not provided for
ed that kerbside lanes should be 3.7 to 4.2 metres wide in guidance. Conversely, Loder & Bayly (1990) indicate
order to be satisfactory for cyclists. This study, however, that kerb lane widths in excess of 4.2 metres should be
was conducted only on roads having a 60 km/h speed limit. avoided where kerbside parking is significant during
some periods, to limit the possibility of moving vehi-
Where a wide kerbside lane cannot be achieved many
cles using a lane occupied by a parked cars;
cyclists would prefer that the left lane be no wider than 3.0
metres, claiming that it enables them to `defend' their where a single lane is bounded by kerbing on both sides,
position in the traffic stream and avoid being `squeezed'. a 4.5 metre wide kerbside lane is the desirable width;
In this case, where provision is required pursuant to Figure
2-4, bicycle routes should not be promoted, particularly where a road has regular curves or where an unusual-
for child or inexperienced cyclists, for whom such cir- ly high number of heavy vehicles use the road a 4.5
cumstances would be inappropriate. However, it must be metre wide kerbside lane is the desirable width.
stressed that it is often not possible to avoid such lane Where the curves are tight, exclusive bicycle lanes are
widths because many four lane roads are accommodated preferred; and
in 20.0 metre reserves thus limiting the width available,
and a left hand lane width less than 3.2 metres is not suit- it is generally accepted that traffic will not travel two
able for buses and trucks. abreast in lanes narrower than 4.5 metres. In some
instances it may be acceptable to increase the width to
Wide kerbside lanes should generally be used only for 5.0 metres. In Adelaide significant lengths of urban
roads with a speed limit up to 70 km/h. In higher speed arterial roads have 5.0 - 5.5 metre wide kerbside lanes
zones exclusive bicycle lanes are preferred. However, they and operate well from the perspective of cyclists,
may be considered in 80 km/h zones if it is not possible to during clearway periods, primarily due to intersection
achieve an exclusive bicycle lane, and a 4.0 to 4.5 metre layout arrangements where the kerbside lane narrows
wide lane can be provided. thus restricting any possibility of lane sharing by
ROADS 33
motor vehicles. This is supported by McHenry et al It may be appropriate for designers to give consideration
(1985, US Study) who found that kerbside lane widths to the interaction of cyclists with adjacent traffic, in vary-
greater than 5.4 metres were excessive due to vehicles ing speed environments or where unusual circumstances
sharing the lane at intersections. exist. The details provided in Figure 4-19 can be used as a
basis to assist calculations for the required facility width
Careful consideration is required where encroachment under such circumstances.
into adjacent lanes may occur. Whether or not encroach-
ment is satisfactory is dependent on the number of trucks Other
or other wide vehicles in the kerbside lane, the level of
traffic (i.e. to determine if sufficient gaps are available) in In some States, bicycle pavement symbols are provided at
the next lane, and direction of traffic in the next lane. the kerbside on arterial roads and on other principal routes
on roads, to identify that the kerbside lane meets the
e Width" (m) requirements of Table 4-4.
60 80' On existing multi-lane roads, which are unable to be

I
widened, the overall dimensional layout of lanes should be
4.2 43 marked in a manner which does not `squeeze' traffic in
[
either the kerbside or adjoining lanes, and that is equitable
I Acceptable Range 3,7-4.5 43-5,0
1
in relation to the needs of the various road users. The

dimensional arrangements for undivided 4 lane and divid-
Table 4-4: Wide Kerbside Lane Dimensions
ed 6 and 8 lane roads shown in Table 4-5, Table 4-6 and
Notes (Table 4-4): Table 4-7 are recommended. For divided 4 lane roads it
would be appropriate to use the kerb and median lane
1. The posted or general speed limit is used, unless 85th dimensions recommended in Table 4-6.
percentile speed is known and is significantly higher.
2. Interpolation for different speed limits is acceptable.

Kerb Law jcatal Kerb L Total Width
3,7 3.0 3.0 3.7 13,4
3. The width of the lane is normally measured from the 3.7 13.6
3,1 3.1 3.7
face of the adjacent left hand kerb. The width of road
3.7 3.2 3.2 3.7 13,8
gutters/channels (comprising a different surface
medium) should be less than 0.4m where minimum 3.8 3.2 3.2 3.8 14.0
dimensions are used. The figures in the table presume 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.9 14.2
that surface conditions are to be of the highest stan- 4.0 3.2 3.2 4.0 14.4
dard. Where there are poor surface conditions (see 4.0 3.3 3.3 4.0 14.6
sect. 8.5.1) over a section of road adjacent to the gutter, 4.1 3.3 3.3 4.1 14.8
then the width of the Wide Kerbside Lane should be
4.1 3.4 3.4 4.1 15.0
measured from the outside edge of that section.
4.2 3.4 3,4 4.2 15.2
4. For roads with a posted speed limit of 80 km/h, wide 4.2 3.5 3.5 4.2 15.4
kerbside lanes are only suitable where the demand for
parking is low. Table 4-5: Dimensional Layout for 4 Lane Undivided Roads
t 14M t t,D" t JAR U

4-A _.A
LL:
* ion.
Figure 4-19: Vehicle Positions on Road Carriageway associated with Wide Kerbside Lanes
34 BICYCLES
TOW Width
2. With a kerbside lane width of 4.3 metres or greater it
e
(C Side) may be appropriate to mark an 1.5 metre wide
Exclusive Bicycle Lane
3.2 10.0
3.1 3.2 10.1 4.4.8. Bus/Bicycle Lanes
3.2
3.1 3.3 10.3 Where the left hand lane of an urban arterial road is a bus
3.2 3.3 10.4
lane it is unreasonable for cyclists to use the normal traf-
fic lane and they should be provided for as follows:
3,2 3.3 10.5
3.3 10.6 in congested city areas where peak period traffic
3.3 3.4 10.7 speeds are about 40 km/h and space can be made avail-
3.4 10.8 able it may be preferable to provide a 1.5 metre wide
3.3 3.5 10.9 bicycle lane to the right of the kerbside bus lane. This
3,3 3.6 11.0 would normally result in a combined bus/bicycle lane
3.3 3.6 11.1 width of 4.0 - 4.5 metres;
3.3 3.6 11.2
through the sharing of narrow (e.g. minimal width) bus
33 3.6 11.3 lanes under very congested conditions. In general this
3..3 3.6 11.4 approach is only applicable where buses do not stop in
3.3 3.7 11.5 the bus lane; or
3A 3.7 11,6
where the speed of buses is relatively high (up to say
3.5 3.7 11.7
80 km/h) a shared lane 4.5 to 5.0 metres wide is nec-
3.6 3.7 11.8
essary so that cyclists and buses can safely overtake
4.5 3.7 3.7 11.9
each other within the lane.
Table 4-6: Dimensional Layout for 6 Lane Divided Roads The following factors need to be considered in choosing
the most appropriate solution for a route:
Total V
Central e
(Ona $ the preferences of cyclists who use the route;
3.9 3.0 3.0 12.9 the speed of buses and other traffic;
3,9 3.0 3.0 3.1 13.0
the location of bus stops;
3.9 3.0 3.0 3.2 13.1
3.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 13.2 the frequency with which buses stop in a length of
3.9 3.1 3.1 3.2 13.3 road; and
3.9 3.1 3.1 3.3 13.4
the available width.
3.9 3.1 3.2 3.3 13.5
3.9 3.2 3.2 3.3 13.6 Signs erected to legally define the bus lane should also
4.0 3.2 3,2 3.3 13.7 make it clear that cyclists are permitted to use the lane
4.0 3.2 3.2 3.4 13.8 unless this is covered in State or Territory traffic regulations.
4.0 3.2 3.3 3.4 13.9
4.0 3.3 3.3 3.4 14.0
4.1 3.3 3.3 3.4 14,1
4.5. Supplementary Road Treatments
4.1 3.3 3.3 14.2
4.5.1. Curves & Turns
4.2 3.3 3.5 14.3
43 3.3 33 3.5 144 Figure 4-20 illustrates an example of a bicycle lane treat-
4.4 3.3 3.3 3.5 14.5 ment option to give protection to cyclists at a curve. In this
4.5 3.3 3.3 3.5 14.6 instance a bicycle lane ramps up to the adjoining footpath
4.5 3.3 3.3 3.6 14.7 in order to protect cyclists from rear end/side swipe colli-
sions whilst travelling around the curve.
Table 4-7: Dimensional Layout for 8 Lane Divided Roads
This form of protection should be used in association
Notes (applicable to Table 4-5, Table 4-6 and Table 4-7) with the various bicycle lane facilities (including wide
kerbside lanes). It is usually required so as to protect and
1. Centre lanes should not be less than 3.2 metres on pri- limit stress to cyclists, as a result of traffic passing
mary arterial roads or those roads carrying large vol- cyclists in the same direction, and which is travelling too
umes of heavy traffic, except where traffic characteris- close to cyclists. It is primarily required on the inside of
tics, the road alignment or the environment permit. curves and turns.
ROADS 35
Figure 4-20: Lane Treatment at Curve (Unley, SA) Figure 4-21: Lane Treatment at Curve using Raised Traffic
Island (East Fremantle, WA)
Other forms of protection that are used and effective,
include: the footpath area. It may be appropriate to establish a sep-
arated path treatment (sect. 6.6.2.2).
pavement bar island (refer AS 1742.2);
raised traffic island (refer Figure 4-21); 4.5.2. Lane Channelisation
fully mountable kerbing at the left side of the carriage-
way (to the direction of travel of cyclists), to permit The use of channelisation treatments such as continuity
access to the footpath at any point along the length of lines and kerbed projections, in association with bicycle
the kerb; and lane facilities, is recognised as extremely important.
close spaced (e.g. 3 metre intervals) raised pavement Raised treatments are appropriate for bicycle/car parking
markers applied outside of bicycle lanes. lanes. Experience has shown that motor traffic will regu-
larly drive in the area of bicycle lanes in the absence of
There is no information to accurately determine under these treatments, which could be hazardous for cyclists .
what conditions protection is required. Traffic
speed and volumes, commercial traffic, kerb-
side motor traffic lane width, the degree of M
encroachment of traffic into existing bicycle

lanes and the radii of curves are all factors that
may influence the need to provide some form
of protection at curves.
However, treatment is desirable at 'sub-stan-

dard' curves (refer AS 1742.2) along urban
arterial and collector roads, and along other
roads that are well used by cyclists .
Care is required to ensure cyclists travelling at

,sw
speed are not directed out into the traffic
stream at the exit point of a curve treatment. It
may be appropriate to construct the exit detail
as shown in Figure 4-24.
Ramps to paths constructed above the car-

riageway level should be in accordance with
Section 4.5.3. 11
Curve treatments should be self-cleaning or

raised in preference to `slots' (see Figure
4-21), where debris can accumulate in the
area of the travelled path of cyclists. k
%, ih, F-4 I
Alternatively, a comprehensive maintenance
program for these types of treatments should
t
be in existence. }
Designers must ensure the safety of pedestri- 11
ans is not compromised by cyclists where the

curve treatment involves cyclists travelling in Figure 4-22: Channelisation Treatments
36 BICYCLES
Also bicycle lanes are relatively uncommon in some cities The locations where channelisation should be provided are
and States, and as such the road rules applicable to bicycle shown in Figure 4-22.
lanes are not always known to all members of the driving
public. Channelisation treatments assist the identification 4.5.3. Ramps
of these facilities and reinforce the appropriate use of the
road near bicycle lanes. Ramps linking a road carriageway and a path located in
the area of the roadside verge may be required in associa-
As much as channelling motor traffic, kerbed projections tion with:
also guide the paths of cyclists to the area of the bicycle lane.
protection at curves (sect.
4.5.1);
T
_________________I
narrowing of right turn
lanes (sect. 5.4.2.6); and
path treatments adjacent

roads (e.g. sect. 6.6.2.2).
t
The exit ramp from the road

/
should be orientated to enable

I
the cyclist to leave the road at

/
a speed appropriate to the

abutting development and the

!
I
level of pedestrian usage of

the path. For example, if a
number of driveways cross
the path or if pedestrians are
ill
likely to emerge from gates

s then the ramp design should
restrict cyclists to a low
speed. If, on the other hand,
Yet%" old Pw^'YWA
the path is adjacent to open
.1
4
V
Sara of K ad ohm space and sight distance is

is Lane stoft
good, and pedestrian num-
bers are few, then the ramp
¼
should permit a relatively

high exit speed. The ramp for
11
ii
1P I
____
I
re-entering the traffic stream

I
1-
should be placed at an angle

that enables cyclists to conve-
niently view traffic approach-
ing in the left hand lane.
src. Gnats
Var6w c,+e
Details of these ramps are
shown in Figure 4-23 and
k Figure 4-24.
no O ) t.Snrr>in.)
The gradient of ramps to and
V from raised path sections
should be constructed to
avoid an abrupt change of
grade in excess of 5% and in
general should not be steeper
than 1 (vert.) in 15 (horiz.)
where high bicycle speeds
are likely.
Figure 4-23: Road Exit & Entry Ramps - Figure 4-24: Road Exit & Entry Ramps -
Lower Speed Movements Higher Speed Movements
ROADS 37
4.6. Provision for Cyclists on Freeways high bridges where prevailing cross winds and turbu-
lence from large motor vehicles can destabilise
4.6.1. General cyclists;
The main issue that must be addressed in deciding whether weaving areas between on-ramps and off-ramps; and
cyclists may use freeways is road safety. The policy with
respect to cyclists using freeways varies between States getting past vehicles stopped in the emergency stop-
ping lane (i.e. shoulder).
and Territories. Where cyclists are permitted to use a free-
way it is important that they are provided with informa- The prevalence of these conditions on most urban free-
tion, guidance and road conditions which enable them to ways makes it less likely that these routes will be satisfac-
use it safely. It is inappropriate for cyclists to use the tory for cyclists unless substantial treatments are imple-
normal traffic lanes of freeways and so the safe use of free- mented to overcome these problems.
ways by cyclists is predicated on the provision of smooth,
debris-free shoulders of adequate width, and the provision
of safe treatments at interchanges.
4.6.2. Suitability For Use.
Because rural freeways usually have relatively low vol- The following factors should be considered in assessing
umes of traffic leaving and entering at interchange ramps the suitability of a freeway for use by cyclists.
and gradients are normally less than non-freeway arterials,
the freeway should provide a safer and more conve-
cyclists are often able to use them with a high level of
nient route than alternative non-freeway routes;
safety and convenience. Cyclists should normally be
allowed to use rural freeways, particularly those having potential for use of the freeway by children should be
sealed shoulders, provided that information is given to low and should also be actively discouraged through
guide them safely across exit and entry ramps. education programs. Such use is likely to be low
because the kinds of trips undertaken by children, short
Where cyclists are permitted to use freeways, and it is
distance trips to school and for recreation, are not well
desired to install devices along the sealed shoulder to alert
served by freeways;
motorists who have inadvertently drifted onto the shoul-
der, the requirements of cyclists should be taken into sealed outer shoulders are essential on freeways which
account in the design of such devices. carry heavy volumes of motor vehicles and significant
The use of urban freeways by cyclists is a matter to be numbers of cyclists. In such situations and where the
determined by the relevant State or Territory road authori- prevailing traffic speeds are 100 km/h a 3.0 metre wide
ty or government which may decide to deny cyclists' shoulder is desirable but a minimum width of 2.0
access to specific freeways because of the difficulties and metres may be used, particularly at squeeze points.
hazards which would confront them in high volume, high Where a section of freeway has an 80 km/h speed zone
speed traffic environments. However, the provision of the corresponding widths are 2.0 metres and 1.5
paths for cyclists within freeway reserves is common, par- metres. Cyclists should not, however, be denied access
ticularly where there is some potential for the use of the to relatively low volume rural freeways which have
freeway by children. On the other hand, there will be narrower sealed shoulders or unsealed crushed rock
instances where the only reasonable alternative arterial shoulders unless there is a convenient and attractive
route is less safe, or is perceived to be less safe, than a free- alternate route;
way. There will be other instances where a freeway is able ramp volumes should be such that adequate gaps occur
to provide an important link in a principal bicycle network. in the traffic stream to allow a safe and convenient
Whilst urban freeways which have 3.0 metre wide sealed crossing of the ramp by cyclists. If volumes are too
shoulders provide a comfortable and reasonably safe envi- high then an alternative route through or around the
ronment for cyclists in mid-block situations the prevailing interchange should be devised;
conditions at many locations give rise to concern about
all ramps should have an outer shoulder at least 1.2
cyclist safety. Locations which are deemed to be unrea-
metres wide, preferably sealed;
sonably hazardous for cyclists include:
ramps exiting and entering the freeway from the right
shoulders which are too narrow, in some instances only
hand lane are likely to be unsuitable for cyclists as they
0.6 metres wide;
have to cross two lanes of high speed traffic to access
off-ramps and on-ramps which carry very heavy vol- them. Alternative routes have to be examined;
umes of high speed traffic throughout the day and night;
a desirable minimum stopping sight distance of 210
sections of freeway where the shoulders are used as metres and an absolute minimum of 150 metres should
bus lanes to provide a relatively high speed express bus be available at locations where cyclists are directed to
service; cross freeway ramps; and
38 BICYCLES
Under special circumstances such as very high traffic gaps of less than 7 seconds) then cyclists should be direct-
volumes or difficult geometry which cause serious ed to use the route illustrated in Figure 4-25(b) or grade
safety hazards, short sections of off-carriageway separation of cyclists should be evaluated. If an on-ramp is
cycling path may need to be provided to enable cyclists controlled by traffic signals then the ability of cyclists to
to by-pass the hazardous area. cross the ramp must be evaluated in relation to the signal
cycle and phasing and other traffic movements which may
4.6.3. Treatments At Interchanges not be controlled by signals.
At interchanges the route to be taken by cyclists should be

established and signed on the following basis:
where it can be established that sufficient gaps will

occur in the motor traffic flow along ramps to enable
cyclists to cross safely, then the route shown in Figure
4-25(a) should be encouraged;
I f
a) Cyclists path through interchange when crossing ramps
if calculations or site observations confirm that insuffi-
cient gaps will exist in the flow of motor vehicles using NOTE: At half diamond interchanges
provide bicycle pats to
the ramp then cyclists should be directed to use the achieve continuity of route.
route shown in Figure 4-25(b); and
at freeway ramps where a significant number of

cyclists have to cross through a large volume of motor
vehicles, delays to cyclists may be excessive causing
them to either take unreasonable risks or use an alter-
native route. In these instances consideration may be
given to providing cyclists with a grade separation. b) Cysts path through interchan avoiding n
cross ramps.
High ramp volumes on an existing freeway may, in the
absence of feasible alternative routes through or Figure 4-25: Bicycle Routes Through Interchanges
around the interchange, indicate that the freeway itself,
or that segment of it ,is unsuitable to cycling. An alter-
native route off the freeway may be required.
In order for cyclists to be able to cross a ramp using the

method shown in Figure 4-25(a), the volume and approach
pattern of motor vehicles using the ramp must be such that
adequate gaps occur in the traffic stream to enable a safe
and convenient crossing of the ramp to be made by cyclists.
This method requires a cyclist to turn from the
4.
shoulderibreakdown lane and cross the ramp at right angles.
It is estimated that a cyclist requires a gap of 7 seconds in
order to cross the ramp safely (Urban Freeway Cycling
Study, Ove Arup and Partners, 1989). This gap was deter-
mined using the assumption that both the bicycle length and
the car width are 2.0 metres. Assuming that the speed of the
bicycle is 5 km/h (1.4 metres per second) at the crossing it
will take almost 3 seconds for the bicycle to pass in front of
the motor vehicle. If it is further assumed that at least 2 sec-
onds clearance is required after the passage of the first vehi-
cle and also before passage of the second vehicle it follows
that a minimum gap of 7 seconds is required.
If the ramp is an off-ramp or the on-ramp is not controlled

by traffic signals it may be reasonable to assume that vehi-
cles using the ramp arrive at random and gap acceptance
theory should be used to estimate the delay likely to be
suffered by cyclists in crossing these ramps. If analysis
indicates that the average delay to cyclist is greater than 15 Figure 4-26: Cyclist Crossing Freeway Ramp at Right Angles
seconds (over which they are assumed to accept unsafe (Melton, Vic.)
40 BICYCLES
Figure 4-28 illustrates minimum typical treatments which However, at many rural interchanges where the number of
should generally be used if it is desired to formalise an at- cyclists is low only signs will be necessary.
grade crossing of a freeway ramp. Figure 4-29 shows a
A number of signs relating specifically to cyclists are
more substantial treatment where channelisation is provid-
desirable to regulate, warn and direct cyclists using free-
ed behind the concrete ramp nose. It may be necessary to ways, particularly in passing through interchanges. Where
provide a lesser treatment if special site conditions exist cyclists are prohibited from using a freeway a sign should
(e.g. a narrow island at the nose) but the principle of be erected at all entry ramps to advise cyclists of the pro-
having cyclists cross the ramp at or near right angles with hibition. This sign is likely to include other prohibited
sight distance requirements should not be compromised. classes of vehicle and pedestrians etc.
"V**.
FREEWAY
....a
+h 0.6m
dswwms all amund
Figure 4-28: Minimum Typical Treatment for at Grade Crossings at Freeway Ramps
FREE-
..a 0 05 ....5
A./d!!-,r&6: L" I
Figure 4-29: Channelisation for Cyclists on Freeway at Ramps

ROADS 41
Where cyclists are permitted to use a freeway it is appro- Figure 4-27 shows the signing recommended to aid
priate to erect signs: cyclists using full diamond interchanges.
at all interchanges to guide cyclists safely across the The geometry of freeway carriageways and ramps will not
ramps or via an alternative route; always be conducive to the economical provision of
underpasses or overpasses at freeway ramps for cyclists.
at entry ramps advising that cyclists are permitted to However, where it is considered that provision of such a
use the freeway; facility is justified designers should refer to Section 7 of
this guide which deals with structures. Figure 4-32 and
adjacent to shoulders advising cyclists to ride as far as
Figure 4-33 illustrate typical underpasses and overpasses
practicable to the left of the shoulder or carriageway;
of freeway ramps.
and
warning motorists that they might encounter cyclists 4.7. Local Area Traffic Management
crossing ramps or on a narrow structure. Schemes
Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) schemes which
elo have the objectives of reducing the speed and volume of

traffic in local streets thereby improving the road safety
EPP RD
and amenity of the area should also include consideration
EXIT
of the needs of cyclists. Relevant standards and AUS-
TROADS guidelines should be used in the planning and
design of LATM schemes.

LATM devices include roundabouts, slow points, road
humps, full or partial road closures and the use of one-way
streets.
Low volume residential streets can provide convenient

routes for cyclists, especially where they are parallel to
arterial roads. Special facilities such as bicycle lanes or
paths are not usually appropriate if adequate traffic man-
agement is provided. These routes are generally slower
than the adjacent arterial road for longer bicycle trips
because cyclists have to cross heavily trafficked arterial
roads at uncontrolled locations. Whilst LATM schemes
can enhance the safety of cyclists through reductions in
the speed and volume of motor traffic, the devices used
Figure 4-30: Cyclist on Freeway Shoulder (Artarmon, NSW)
can also reduce the relative attractiveness of local streets
in terms of travel time for cyclists. Wherever possible
LATM devices should be designed, and a smooth surface
maintained, so that cyclists can safely and comfortably
pass through them at 20 km/h.
ti
The following devices or circumstances are often a con-
cern to cyclists:
one-way devices and road closures can disadvantage

cyclists in particular, due to the physical imposition of
having to travel a longer route, which perhaps may
have less favourable traffic conditions for cycling;
single lane devices that are reliant on visual obstruc-
tion for effective operation e.g. Driveway Links, where
a combination of the landscaping and a curving 'drive-
way' alignment produces conditions where cyclists
may be vulnerable;
devices that create squeeze points for cyclists where

the speed environment exceeds 40 km/h, and particu-
larly where motor traffic speeds remain at a reasonably
high level (e.g. 60 km/h) as may be the case with two
Figure 4-31: Cycling Ramp to Freeway (Artarmon, NSW) lane slow points;
42
a) ON RAMP
BICYCLES
FREEWAY
Figure 4-32: Desirable Treatment at Underpass

FREEWAY
7.4
SECTION A-A
0) ON RAMP
b) OFF RAMP
P
ROADS
FREEWAY
FREEWAY
Figure 4-33: Desirable Treatment at Overpass

'on 7-4)
43
44 BICYCLES
devices with rough or difficult surface conditions for By-passes are likely to be most appropriate in the case of
cyclists, including cobbled surfaces, and the ramps of road closures, or in wide streets where the device creates
some road humps and other raised devices; and a road narrowing and adequate width exists on the depar-
ture enabling cyclists and motor vehicles to share the road
devices located at the bottom of hills, due to the diffi- safely. They are also beneficial to cyclists at road humps
culty of negotiating raised devices with a bicycle in in some instances. Physical measures (e.g. kerbing) are
this circumstance, and to the physical imposition to desirable to prevent motor traffic using by-passes of
cyclists of having to climb a hill from a slow speed. LATM devices.
If a device must be located at the bottom of a hill then a
roundabout or slow point is preferred to more `restrictive' Various devices are discussed below.
devices e.g. a road hump. On gentle gradients, plateau
(a) Roundabouts
style humps are preferred to roundabouts or slow points.
Devices should utilise fully-mountable kerb and channel, Roundabouts are often installed at local street intersections
which is much more forgiving than a stone or concrete to control motor vehicle speeds. The objective of the treat-
barrier kerb, should a cyclist run into it. All devices should ment may be to reduce the number and severity of motor
be adequately lit and marked for safe night-time use. vehicle crashes and/or to improve the amenity of the local
street. In general, at local street roundabouts cyclists are
By-passes or paths for cyclists through devices are a
expected to completely integrate with other road users by
useful means of avoiding the problems listed above.
merging with motor traffic on the approach to the round-
However, where by-passes of traffic management devices
about and taking their turn through the roundabout. If the
are provided:
roundabout is designed correctly speeds should be low
the responsible authority must have a commitment to enough to ensure safe integration. Separate channelisation
sweep them frequently, or alternatively the design for cyclists on roundabout approaches is not recommended
must be 'self-cleaning' such that debris from landscap- because of the propensity for left turning motor vehicles to
ing will not accumulate in the cyclists' path; conflict with cyclists travelling through the roundabout.
Roundabouts are discussed in more detail in Section 5.5.2.
they should be designed to provide adequate clearance
to obstacles (e.g. trees and signs); and (b) Slow Points
they should not lead cyclists into hazardous situations Slow points are generally installed at mid block locations.
on the departure side where cyclists may re-join the They may have two lanes, one for each direction of travel,
general traffic flow. or a single lane shared by both directions. As with round-
.or
F TPATH {
I-
1.5m miry clear

Raised islands
Cyclist must be pmtected It

against motorist swinging Accumulation of debris -
wide in this area a problem in this area
Figure 4-35: By-pass of Slow Point - Layout

ROADS 45
From the perspective of cyclists, sinusoidal profile humps

are preferred to either Flat Top or Watts profile humps.
It is desirable that adequate road width is allowed at the

hump so that cyclists are not `squeezed'. Alternatively side
tapers should not exceed a gradient steeper than I (vert.) in
8 (horiz.), or the hump should not be constructed within 1.0
metre of the kerb. Humps should not extend across the bicy-
cle lanes. Where width can be made available a by-pass
similar to that illustrated in Figure 4-36 may be provided to
enable cyclists to maintain speed through the devices.
Designers should consult relevant standards and regula-

tions to determine the requirements for the construction of
road humps.
Figure 4-34: By-pass of Slow Point
abouts cyclists are generally expected to share the road (d) Road Closures
space with motorists. However, where a collector road is
very wide it may be possible and desirable to provide a by- Bicycle paths should be provided through all (partial or
pass of the device as illustrated in Figure 4-35. full) road closures to maintain accessibility and mobility
for cyclists. The paths should have a smooth all weather

(c) Road Humps surface, be of adequate width and be designed to prevent
use by motor vehicles. The alignment of paths should not
Road humps such as the plateau (flat top) style or Watts be so circuitous that cyclists have difficulty negotiating
(rounded) profile should not present a safety problem to paths through road closures. Any signs to restrict motor
cyclists provided they are not placed at the bottom of steep vehicles should have a supplementary plate `Bicycles
grades and they are suitably lit and marked. However it is Excepted.' A typical treatment is illustrated in Figure 4-37.
important that the profile and surface is such that cyclists Different treatments may be suitable depending on site
have a smooth and comfortable ride over the hump. To conditions. For example, in the case of a T intersection
achieve this, in the case of plateau humps, it is desirable where the stem of the T is closed a single 2.5 metre path
that ramp gradients are constructed not steeper than 1 through the closure may be appropriate. Cyclists should
(vert.) in 15 (horiz.). also be allowed to access streets through partial closures.
BicycletCar 'By-pass' for bicycles

parking lam
Road Hump
I NP
L
F TPATH
FOOTPATH
I I
1.5m min Accumulation of V Raised isian

clear wicfth debris - a problem
In this area
Figure 4-36: By-pass of Road Hump - Layout

46 BICYCLES
(e) One Way Streets
In order to maximise accessibility and mobility of cyclists

it is desirable for cyclists to be allowed to use one way
streets against the flow of motor vehicles, through the use
of a contra-flow bicycle lane (sect. 4.4.3).
R::.ed
tu,
Figure 4-37: Typical Road Closure Access Details
Fi uo a 4-38: Road Closure Access (Parkside, SA)

47
5 Road Intersections
5.1. Introduction 5.2. Issues at Intersections for Cyclists

This chapter provides information on treatments which
5.2.1. General
should be adopted, where necessary and practicable, to
improve the safety and convenience for cyclists using At intersections on busy roads cyclists often face the fol-
intersections along roads. lowing problems:
Intersections, by their very nature, are locations where narrowing of the traffic lane or pavement creating a
there is considerable potential for conflict between differ- `squeeze point', often caused by the introduction of
ent traffic streams and different road users. At busy inter- additional lanes for turning motor traffic;
sections motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians often have to
deal with complex situations and be aware of the position, insufficient room is available for cyclists to travel
movement and intent of other users. This can be a between cars and the kerb, or between lanes of traffic,
demanding task for many people and errors in judgement thus impeding their progress to the stop line whilst the
do occur. In the case of cyclists this is confirmed by crash traffic signals are red, or to the Give Way line in the
records (Federal Office of Road Safety, 1988) which show case of an unsignalised intersection;
that most reported bicycle crashes occur at intersections,
once at the stop line of a signalised intersection
involve cars and are of a serious nature. The most signifi-
cyclists have to stand forward of the stop line (and pos-
cant causes of bicycle/motor vehicle crashes at intersec-
sibly pedestrian crosswalk area) in order to be seen by
tions appear to be:
a motorist waiting at the stop line. This may cause
cyclist not conspicuous or `did not see him' ; inconvenience to pedestrians as well as cyclists;
incorrect perception of intent of cyclist; and cyclists often have difficulty moving from the left lane
to the centre of the road on the approach to the inter-
behaviour of cyclist contrary to anticipated pattern. section in order to turn right;
These causes highlight the need for education of both when performing a conventional right turn at a sig-
motorists and cyclists to encourage better understanding, nalised intersection cyclists have to either travel to the
better conspicuity and hence safer sharing of roads. left of the queue of right turning motorists and can be
However, physical improvement of intersections is also an squeezed' by the opposing right turn movement, or
important part of programs to improve safety for cyclists claim' the right turn lane which is not always easy to
because the presence of a facility, as well as providing do and is sometimes not appreciated by other road
space for cyclists, also heightens motorists awareness of users;
cyclists and enables motorists to better predict the move-
ment of cyclists. motorists sometimes overtake `through' cyclists only
to immediately turn left in front of them risking a col-
In catering for the needs of cyclists, designs should con- lision;
form to the standard approach and principles of traffic
engineering design for all road users. This practice seeks cyclists are vulnerable when travelling through the
to provide traffic facilities which clearly indicate the diverge and merge areas of left turn treatments;
nature and extent of traffic movements and the potential although traffic signals are sophisticated, bicycles are
conflicts. All road users, including cyclists, will benefit often not detected at signalised intersections. The time
from a traffic environment which assists the road user to provided for cyclists to clear intersections can be inad-
anticipate potential conflicts and encourages traffic aware- equate, particularly for large intersections on uphill
ness and predictable behaviour. grades;
At many urban intersections it will be difficult to enable cyclists perceive that roundabouts are unsafe, particu-
the installation of special treatments for bicycles. larly large multi-lane roundabouts, and there is some
However, where space is available road authorities, engi- evidence to suggest that this is the case;
neers, planners and designers should provide them, partic-
ularly where bicycle lanes exist or are proposed on roads traffic turning right across the location of waiting cyclists
passing through the intersection. in an opposing traffic stream (i.e. `corner cutting');
48 BICYCLES
multiple left turn lanes where `through' cyclists need to - less visible form of cyclists (when compared with
travel well out into the carriageway in order to comply motor traffic); and
with their legal obligations; and
- focus of drivers' attention when negotiating inter-
shared right and through lanes (see Table 5-1). section.
In reviewing intersections in this way the potential for con-

flict is often readily apparent. This approach can be used to
evaluate intersection proposals and potential solutions.
I
Figure 5-1: Cyclist in Diverge Area without Facilities
5.2.2. Process to Evaluate Conflict for Cyclists

Whilst Section 5.2.1 lists some of the common concerns
for cyclists at intersections, not all problems are obvious.
This section outlines an approach that is sometimes neces-
sary to identify conflicts involving cyclists at intersections
associated with unusual intersection arrangements, or Qs Ponenpai Goer Pod,f
Pafl of MOW V
which could be used during the intersection design process.
PosskAo path of Cj"
Figure 5-2 and the associated Table 5-1 are of a signalised
Figure 5-2: Conflict Diagram Illustrating some Potential
intersection provided as an example to assist the discus- Bicycle Movements
sions in this section. Note, the approach proposed herein
is equally applicable to non-signalised intersections. Conflict Point Explanation of Potential Conflict
The approach involves the following: l "t"hrough` cyclist and left turn vehicle,
plot the common legal movements for each traffic moving away from stop line.
signal phase, by motor-vehicle traffic; 2 l As for Conflict Point 1
superimpose potential bicycle movements (from kerb- 3 Cyclist avoiding the conflict at t & 2, wait-
side, and otherwise). With reference to Figure ing to travel through intersection when
5-2/Table 5-1, cyclists in their judgement, sometimes through phase red and left turn phase green,
feel compelled to perform illegal manoeuvres in view
of safety considerations (e.g. Conflict Points 6 and 7), 4 Cyclist crossing from a left turn law to
as the risk may be less than that for alternative legal I right turn lane. from the kerbside
manoeuvres (e.g. Conflict Point 8). A meaningful
assessment of the risks to cyclists at intersections must motor traffic scanning for other
account for such manoeuvres; motor traffic and failing to see 'through'
cyclist,
assess potential for hazards accounting for:
6 Right turning cyclists crossing
- likely choices by experienced and other cyclists motor traffic lane,
(as above);
7 As for Conflict Point 6.
- general movement characteristics at intersection
and speed differential between cyclists and other S Cyclist waiting to turn right when right turn
traffic; p h' phase green.
- legitimate movements of pedestrians; Table 5-1: Details of Conflicts Illustrated in Figure 5-2
ROAD INTERSECTIONS 49
5.3. Typical Intersections details 5.3.2. Bicycle/Car Parking Lanes
This section describes the treatments necessary to ade- Bicycle/car parking lanes (sect. 4.4.2) should be treated in
quately provide for cyclists at intersections with a view to the same way as the exclusive bicycle lane shown in Figure
overcoming the types of problems described above. 5-3(b). Where a narrow bicycle lane extends through the
intersection, the continuity line indicates the area in which
The following general treatments are appropriate at intersec- car and bicycle paths are expected to cross. This treatment
tions for each type of traffic lane described in Section 4.4: should be marked whether or not a left turn lane is marked
(with arrows) to encourage cyclists to travel in a pre-
5.3.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes dictable path relative to adjacent motor traffic.
Where sufficient pavement width exists, or can be provided

5.3.3. Wide Kerbside Lanes
on new projects, exclusive bicycle lanes (sect. 4.4.1) should
be carried through intersections as shown in Figure 5-3(a), Lane width should be carried through the intersection to
This is consistent with the treatment of motor vehicle traffic avoid the creation of a `squeeze point' for cyclists. No spe-
lanes which are carried through minor intersections. Where cial road marking is provided in these cases. Refer also to
width is limited and special left turn lanes are provided for Section 4.4.7.
motorists a narrow lane may be provided for cyclists as
shown in Figure 5-3(b). Continuity lines should be used to
define the length of lane where car and bicycle paths cross.
U n gene
0 D
(a) i km wWw exclusive left tum lanes
(b) InUnsection w" exclusive left tum lanes
Figure 5-3: Treatment of Exclusive Bicycle Lanes at Minor Intersections

50 BICYCLES
Figure 5-4: Right Turn Treatment Causing `Squeeze' Point Figure 5-6: Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane Treatment (Brighton, SA)
ONE
tAIAY
'Craft L ') T
/// 1111111110e
0
74
Figure 5-5: Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes - Signalised Intersection Details
5.3.4. Contra-Flow Bicycle Lanes

Figure 5-5 highlights the typical regulatory features asso-
ciated with a signalised intersection of a one-way road that
may be required where a contra-flow bicycle lane (sect.
4.4.3) exists.
5.3.5. Protected Two-Way lanes
Intersections of protected lanes (sect. 4.4.5) and side roads

require careful consideration. There is some potential for
cyclists to be unseen by road traffic at intersections, par-
ticularly where cyclists are travelling against the normal
direction of flow for a given side.
With reference to Figure 5-7, it is important the approach

curves are of a sufficiently large radius so as to not incon-
venience cyclists, and also to avoid the impression on
Figure 5-7: Protected Two-Way Lanes - Intersection Details motorists that cyclists are turning at the intersection
(rather than simply crossing one approach). For similar
reasons the offset of the path alignment should be limited
(6 metres suggested).
At the crossings of side roads, median refuges (sect.

6.7.2.3(b)) may be desirable.
5.3.6. Shared Traffic Lanes traffic signals will automatically return to that signal
phase. Side roads and right turn phases, however, do not
In these cases insufficient width is available to provide have a permanent demand and those traffic movements are
special treatment for cyclists but traffic management mea- only activated when a vehicle is detected. by the relevant
sures can improve the environment for all road users. pavement detector loop.
Where a traffic lane catering for cyclists cannot be carried Detector loops are used to register the presence of traffic
through an intersection the lane should be terminated at at signalised intersections, and are therefore a common
least 50 metres before the intersection and consideration feature. Pavement inductive loop detectors are the most
should be given to provision of a sign warning motorists common form of detector.
of merging cyclists. The proliferation of such signs may
limit any positive impact and as such it is desirable that the The following aspects are important, in relation to tradi-
signs are deployed only where cyclist volumes are high or tional inductive loop detectors:
where there are particular concerns for the safety of many cyclists are unaware of where to position them-
cyclists.
selves at traffic signals in order to maximise the chance
Where the lane is used by inexperienced cyclists it may be of detection by loop detectors;
desirable to provide the option of a cyclists' path (i.e. in with the growth in composite non-metallic bicycles
the area of the roadside verge) through the intersection. there is some concern that inductive loops will become
increasingly ineffective. Leschinski (1994) found that
5.4. Signalised Intersections loop detectors are relatively poor at detecting cyclists;
As most cycling will continue to take place on the road Leschinski also found that detection levels vary for dif-
network the needs of cyclists should be incorporated into ferent types of bicycles at different inductive loop sen-
the design of signalised intersections. Particular attention sitivities. However, in the case of the common
should be paid to cyclists' requirements when traffic lanes `Symmetripole' loop, detection levels for different
are narrowed and exclusive left turn and right turn lanes types of bicycles were reasonably consistent over a
are installed to improve traffic flow on the approaches. range of sensitivities; and
Where a significant number of cyclists use an approach at inductive loop detectors have the advantage that
times when motor traffic demand is low it may be desir- cyclists waiting at traffic signals away from the kerb-
able to install a special push button to enable cyclists to side can be detected.
place a call and/or ensure that the green time is long
The design of traffic signal installations should cater for
enough to allow them to pass through the intersection on a
the detection of bicycles at all legitimate waiting positions
green signal. The button must be placed so that cyclists
(of bicycles) for all phases which do not have a permanent
can conveniently reach it without having to dismount.
demand.
Generally the features discussed in the following sections
Varying preferences for alternative forms of detection of
would cater for experienced and competent cyclists and
cyclists have been expressed by different State road
should be incorporated into intersection designs. These
authorities. The following forms of detection are available.
features should not be seen as a satisfactory solution for
the young and less experienced cyclist who should be (a) Road markings to Assist Detection
encouraged through education programs to dismount and
use pedestrian facilities, or to choose alternative routes The markings illustrated in Figure 5-8 and Figure 5-9
along local streets. Such alternative routes should have a assist the detection of cyclists at traditional loop detectors
suitable surface and gradients and not add excessively to by highlighting the appropriate position at which cyclists
trip distance. should wait in order to maximise the chances of detection.
Some problems have been experienced with the use of
5.4.1. Bicycle Detection At Traffic Signals these markings. On occasions they are not reinstated after
road resurfacing.
In order for cyclists to satisfactorily and legally use traffic
signals it is necessary that detection equipment is capable Also, maintenance of the markings is sometimes poor due
of detecting bicycles. Unfortunately at many sites this is to the installation of the markings on side roads under the
not the case, leaving cyclists with the inconvenient alter- responsibility of a local authority, at a Main Road author-
native of having to ride on to the footpath and use the ity intersection. Such problems are exacerbated as a result
pedestrian push buttons. When faced with this alternative, of the small size or lack of availability of the markings.
cyclists may choose to disobey the law and proceed Therefore special attention is needed to ensure the mark-
against a red signal. ings are properly maintained.
Generally the major road at an intersection will have a per- This option is also affected by the performance limitations
manent demand programmed into the controller so that the of inductive detectors as discussed above.
52 BICYCLES
6 diamond markings
(100nm x 100mm)
at 300mm as.
Sync
-See irtSet
Typical Pavement Marking

of Sensitive Area of Loop
Figure 5-9: Road Markings to Assist Bicycle Detection - Details
(c) Push Button Actuators
Push button actuators are a widely used form of detection

Figure 5-8: Road Markings to Assist Bicycle Detection
at traffic signals for both cyclists and pedestrians. These
(b) `SCOOT' Loop have the advantage of providing a form of detection not
rendered ineffective by non-metallic bicycles.
Leschinski (1994) found the `SCOOT' Loop to have supe-
rior detection performance for bicycles, in comparison to Push button actuators must be conveniently located for
a number of other inductive loop detector arrangements, cyclists. They can be located at or used in combination
including the common `Symmetripole' loop. This was also with a holding rail, to serve as a prop to cyclists wishing
reported to be the simplest and least expensive inductive to maintain a ready position whilst waiting at the signals.
loop detector to install. However, they should be located with sufficient clearance
to passing or manoeuvring traffic (0.3 - 0.6 metres gener-
The layout of a SCOOT Loop is shown in Figure 5-10. ally) to avoid being damaged.
1-90M
t,90m
rce: Australian R Research rd ARR 24
Figure 5-10: `SCOOT' Loop Detector

(d) Other Forms of Detection where the detector (say push button) is located such
that cyclists need to move forward of the stop bar.
The disadvantages of the push button actuator when
cyclists are positioned away from the kerbside, and of loop In some situations it is desirable to locate detectors in
detectors in relation to non-metallic bicycles, have advance of intersections to minimise the delay to cyclists.
prompted calls for alternative methods of detection. This can result in a dramatic improvement in the `level of
Alternatives include infra-red, microwave and video based service' for cyclists at signalised intersections.
detection systems. These are not widely used and there-
fore road authorities are encouraged to trial such systems.
5.4.2. Signalised Intersection Treatments
(e) Other Considerations 5.4.2.1. Approach Lane Widths
Care should be exercised in the application of detectors of Kerbside lanes on the approaches to signalised intersec-
any type. They should not be installed where cyclists need tions should be 4.0 - 4.5 metres wide to enable cyclists to
to wait in a potentially hazardous or illegal position. The pass through the intersection without being squeezed or
following situations should be avoided: causing disruption to motor traffic and to enable special
lanes to be marked where appropriate.
where a separate left turn phase/arrow exists and the
cyclist `through' movement detector is located at the However, where narrow traffic lanes have been provided
left side of the carriageway. to improve traffic capacity or flow, experienced cyclists
have to share the lane with motor traffic, defending their
For instance, a `through' cyclist may be waiting in con-
space by positioning themselves in the centre of the lane

flict with left turning motor traffic moving with an
as required.
exclusive left turn signal phase;
A shared path may be provided where it is desired to pro-
where the predominate cyclist movement differs from
and is in conflict with the predominant lane movement,
vide a special facility for young and inexperienced
cyclists.
and the location of the detector contributes to the
potential for conflict. This may be applicable to a par-
ticular traffic signal phase. 5.4.2.2. Separate Bicycle Lanes on Approaches
This is similar to the more common but specific exam- Where a wide approach lane can be provided it is desirable
ple given in the point above, however it applies to other to provide approach and stand up lanes for cyclists to
movements. An example is a right turning cyclist in a enable them to pass queued motor vehicles in advancing to
shared right and through lane, waiting in conflict with the stop line. These lanes should be at least 1.2 metres
motor traffic moving with a `through' traffic signal wide and marked with a bicycle pavement symbol and
phase; and appropriate arrow to encourage correct lane discipline.
Left turn aeration tam. Woo varies
Figure 5-11: Bicycle Lanes at Signalised Intersections Also Showing Advanced Stop Lines
54 BICYCLES
Such a treatment will also benefit motorists in terms of In practice many cyclists intending to turn right ride to the
improved traffic flow. left of motor vehicles which are turning or intending to
turn right in order to avoid conflict with this traffic stream.
An example of bicycle stand up lanes is shown in Figure This means that they may be exposed to conflict with
5-11. The through lane for bicycles marked within the left `through' motor traffic. The right turn bicycle lane shown
turn lane is required to enable cyclists to legally ride on in Figure 5-11 creates space for cyclists, providing protec-
this area of road pavement. It also enables through bicy- tion from moving motor vehicles and enabling cyclists to
cles to advance to the head of a stationary queue. In prac- easily advance to the head of the right turning queue.
tice, without such a lane through cyclists choose either to
ride within the left turn lane in contravention of the law or It is acknowledged that there may be situations where it is
ride within the through lane and are placed at greater risk difficult for cyclists to safely cross to the centre of the road
because of the speed of traffic and the presence of the on the intersection approach. In these cases cyclists, par-
intersection. The minimum lane width remaining for ticularly the inexperienced, may choose to perform a
motorists should be 2.5 metres which is the absolute min- `hook' or `box' turn which is discussed in Section 5.4.2.4.
imum required for cars. A disadvantage of this lane width Although double left and double right turn lanes are diffi-
is that cyclists turning left will have to join any moving cult for cyclists to negotiate a similar treatment to that
stream of left turning motor traffic. If space can be made shown in Figure 5-11 may be provided in these cases in
available this lane should be 3.7 metres wide, effectively order to indicate to motorists that cyclists have a right to
providing a wide kerbside lane for left turning cyclists. ride through the diverge area.
Another variation of a stand-up lane is shown in Figure Where a bicycle lane is provided on an intersection
5-15(c). This may be appropriate where a bicycle lane approach which has a left turn slip lane the continuity
between intersections is located at the kerbside, and a high (dashed) line marking the bicycle lane should be contin-
volume of left turn motor traffic or an exclusive left turn ued as shown in Figure 5-12 to indicate to the left turning
phase, exists at an intersection. motorists that they are crossing a bicycle lane.
- - -
- -
I
'4
'4
____
II
I I
a
I
I
I
II
I.
'4
I I
I I
*
*
.4
11
I!
Figure 5-12: Treatment of Bicycle Lane at a Left Turn Slip Lane

Preferably, the large head-start storage area options would

be implemented so that cyclists would not cross more than
one lane of traffic from the point of entry to the storage
area, as in Figure 5-15(c) or Figure 5-15(d). Conversely,
the layout of the storage area shown in Figure 5-15(b) may
result in right turning cyclists crossing two lanes of traffic
whilst within the storage area. Sustrans (1997) indicates
these treatments have been successful for traffic flows of
1000 vehicles per hour in one direction, and with up to 3
lane approaches, and that they are normally appropriate for
right turning cyclists on approaches with one or two lanes.
Figure 5-13: Stand-up Bicycle Lane with Continuity Line

Marking Adjacent to Left Turn Slip Lane
5.4.2.3. Bicycle `Head Start' Storage Area
Where an exclusive bicycle lane, bicycle/car parking lane

or wide kerbside lane is continued through an intersection,
a `head start' storage area should be provided for cyclists,

through the use of an àdvanced stop line', so that they
may `store' in front of motor traffic. Advanced stop line
treatments are a common feature in some Australian cities.
This type of treatment is useful where:
left turn vehicles cross the path of bicycles travelling

straight ahead; and
a `squeeze point' exists on the departure side of the

intersection.
Typical advanced stop line treatments are shown in Figure

5-15. These treatments formalise the common practice adopt-
ed by experienced cyclists who wait in front of the kerbside
Figure 5-14 Advanced Stop Line at Signalised Intersection
lane traffic so they can be seen by left turning motorists who
might inadvertently cut them off. Where a narrow kerbside
lane exists on a route used by a significant number of cyclists 5.4.2.4. `Hook' Turns
the motor vehicle stop line should be placed 2.0 to 2.4 metres
from the pedestrian crosswalk line as shown in Figure 5-15(a) The hook turn is illustrated in Figure 5-16. The hook turn
to enable cyclists to store at the head of the queue without reduces conflicts between bicycles and motor vehicles and
causing inconvenience to pedestrians. enhances the safety of cyclists. Less experienced cyclists
often prefer it to the centre of the road turn at major inter-
If the volume of cyclists is high then consideration may be sections and should be encouraged to use it.
given to providing cyclists with a larger storage space (e.g.
Figure 5-15 b, c and d), special lanterns and an early start At signalised intersections the hook turn is performed in
in the signal phasing so they can move off safely prior to two stages, each during a green phase. At intersections
the start of the motor vehicle phase. A contrasting surface where many cyclists perform hook turns an area should be
colour is desirable in the storage and stand-up lane area to provided for the cyclists to wait on the left of the through
discourage encroachment by motor traffic (DOT, 1996). lanes within the intersection. Provision of this area
requires the pedestrian crosswalk lines to be set back 1.2
The lane arrangement shown in Figure 5-15(c) would be to 2 metres, depending on cyclist demand, from the edge
appropriate where an exclusive left turn traffic signal of the through lanes.
phase exists. A further variation of a large head-start stor-
age area is shown in Figure 5-15(d). It should be noted, however, that the box turn may be ille-
gal in some States and the traffic signal phasing at some
The form of head-start storage used, and the layout of intersections may not suit a hook turn. For instance, wait-
approach bicycle lanes, needs to be determined with con- ing cyclists who have performed the first stage of a hook
sideration of site conditions, and of bicycle and motor traf- turn manoeuvre could be in conflict with an exclusive left
fic volumes. turn phase or a diagonal pedestrian crossing phase.
56
BICYCLES
Figure 5-15: Advanced Stop Line Treatment Options

- oft am - STEP 3 With

east West
Wow ph
0111sets to
n9 esuians:
1 1
STEP I with
north south
green phase
Figure 5-16: Hook Turns
5.4.2.5. Right Turn Storage Bay for Cyclists

lishment of a right turn bay for cyclists to the left of the
Where a central traffic lane is available for through and main carriageway (see Figure 5-17), to permit a 'for-
right turning movements, and signal phasing dictates that malised' hook turn, may be appropriate. This facility
turning vehicles wait in the lane when through traffic is would require a cyclist push button and lantern to pro-
able to proceed, cyclists can be vulnerable when turning vide a phase for cyclists, which may operate exclusively
right. Cyclists are unprotected and relatively obscure in or with other phases.
comparison to other traffic, such that through traffic may
not see them waiting in the same lane. `Storage bays' have also been used at unsignalised junctions
where the carriageway is narrow and cyclists are otherwise
Where there is insufficient carriageway width to permit vulnerable when waiting to perform a right turn manoeuvre
the construction of a right turn bicycle lane, the estab- in a similar circumstance to that described above.
** *
::::;:::::::
I
H
-
/ /,'
I
\\
,
1
I
I
k
-1
Figure 5-17: Right Turn Storage Bay Details

5.4.2.6. Narrowing at Right Turn Lane designation of the footpath as a shared footway. This
should be regarded as a last resort. This option is not
Measures implemented to alleviate traffic congestion and usually appropriate in shopping centres or near
improve traffic flow on arterial roads often involve the pro- schools, hospitals or other places where high pedestri-
vision of right turn lanes at critical intersections in what are an activity occurs. A typical treatment is illustrated in
called `5 lane' or isolated `S' treatments. However, the right
Figure 5-20; and
turn lanes are often achieved by narrowing the through
lanes and this creates squeeze points for cyclists if the above options are not possible then cyclists will
have to defend their lane through the intersection or an
Depending on the pavement width (existing or able to be alternative route for cyclists may be developed and
constructed), the following options should be considered sign posted.
in the design and construction of new treatments, or at
existing intersections for overcoming the `squeeze point' 5.4.2.7. Through Access at Junctions
problem for cyclists:
In order to limit the delay to cyclists at junctions, circum-
provision of an exclusive bicycle lane which may be stances may permit the construction of a `through' lane (or
the continuation of a mid-block bicycle lane or an path) for cyclists opposite the discontinuing leg of a junc-
short section on either side of the carriageway as tion, as shown in Figure 5-21.
shown in Figure 5-18;
This treatment may be appropriate where:
At locations where the existing lane widths are less property access does not exist opposite the discontinu-
than 3.0 metres the exclusive bicycle lane may be pro- ing leg of the junction;
vided by relocation, narrowing or removal of a raised
median or narrowing of a footpath; pedestrian activity in the vicinity of the junction is lim-
ited and the number of pedestrian crossing movements
At locations where the existing lane widths are 3.4 of the bicycle path is low;
metres they may be narrowed to 3.0 metres (minimum)
to provide bicycle lanes; the proportion of elderly, visually impaired and other
disabled pedestrians is low; and
provision of wide kerbside lanes. Five lane treatments where a bicycle lane exists on both sides of the junc-
similar to that illustrated in Figure 5-19 are often tion, on the relevant side of the road.
provided by narrowing other traffic lanes which creates
a squeeze point for cyclists. Wherever practicable a Whilst numerous options exist, the sign and delineation
wide kerbside lane should be provided through these details shown in Figure 5-21 represents one solution that
treatments; could be used.
'1:
v---Romp up to Podftbiaft Cmaing
Figure 5-21: Through Access at Junctions

60 BICYCLES
Physical separation between the bicycle path and the prin- Ìntersection Crossing Time') to enable cyclists to safely
cipal road carriageway is desirable at the junction and clear intersections.
should be achieved through the use of kerbing or a raised
island. The following alternative responses could also be consid-
ered:
Designers must ensure the safety of pedestrians is not
compromised. It may be appropriate to establish a sepa- i) Install a special push button actuator located in
rated path treatment (sect. 6.6.2.2) where the bicycle path advance of the relevant intersection approach or other
is raised and adjacent to the footpath. form of detection, to enable passing cyclists to push
the button or actuate the detector, in order to extend
Where the through access lane passes over a pedestrian specific phase times.
crossing, the crossing should be designated in a manner
that is consistent with local practice and should incorpo- Note, there is some concern that this method would
rate one or a combination of the following: give rise to expectations by cyclists which if not met
could result in a hazardous situation for cyclists.
Zebra crossing (refer AS 1742.10); However such a circumstance is similar to those at
large intersections where the intersection crossing time
Raised platform; and/or
for cyclists is insufficient.
Give way controls.
ii) A `yellow' cyclist lantern would switch on to warn
The width of the separator (island or otherwise) should cyclists to stop before other traffic within a specific
account for the pedestrian crossing demand.
(same) phase. The time and the phase would be depen-

dent on Intersection Crossing Time calculations.
The following implementation issues are important: Therefore intergreen times would effectively be
the construction of a `slot' in the area of the bicycle extended, but only for cyclists.
path that will accumulate debris should be avoided if
This method has the disadvantage that cyclists would
possible; and in total receive less `green time' than other traffic.
warning signs or other measures may be appropriate However, the issue of long crossings (or insufficient
where there is potential for conflict with pedestrians green times) is a serious concern such that some form
crossing the path of cyclists. of action should be taken, and the ability to find addi-
tional time at many signalised intersections operating
5.4.3. Phase Times close to saturation will leave few alternatives.
(a) General iii) In some instances it may be beneficial to install full

cyclist signals (red/green etc.), to enable:
The length of the intergreen period (time between end of
green period for one phase and start of green period for the the `yellow' signal adjustment as described above;
next phase) at traffic signals can be an issue for cyclists, an early start in the signal phasing so cyclists can move
particularly where the crossing distance through an inter- off prior to the start of the motor traffic phase; or
section is long.
a long cyclist green phase during which cyclists can
Cyclists travel in the order of half the speed of motor-vehi-
clear the intersection, after the other traffic signal
cles (depending on the circumstances, e.g. intersection and
phases have changed to red.
approach gradient, cyclist arrival speed) and as such the
time to travel through the `conflict zone' may be double Publicity to inform cyclists as well as other road users of
that of other traffic. Cyclists can enter the `conflict zone' the presence of these alternative treatments and the
of an intersection legally and have insufficient time to manner in which they should be used, is regarded as very
clear it. important.
The time to travel from the point of entry at an intersec- (c) Intersection Crossing Time Calculation
tion, to a conflict point is dependent on the location of that
conflict point, which in turn is dependent on the paths of The intersection crossing time is the period it takes a
traffic. The problem is therefore phase specific. Hence, all cyclist to pass through the ìntersection conflict zone',
movements should be checked to confirm minimum inter- from the point of entering a signalised intersection (from
green times for various phases. the stop bar) to the last point of conflict with another legal
movement of traffic (including pedestrians).
(b) Treatment Alternatives
In order to provide a safe crossing period, the 15th
Signal phasing and/or green or intergreen times, should be Percentile crossing speed of cyclists should be used. In the
adjusted utilising the information provided below to event that such provision is unattainable, the median (50th
ensure that a sufficient period of time exists (e.g. Percentile) speed should be used.
The following aspects need to be considered in the deter- speeds at signalised intersections. If free flow condi-
mination of the Intersection Crossing Time: tions do not exist it would be appropriate to either
assume no gradient exists or to measure the speed of
Cyclist Travelling at Speed (refer Table 5-2) - to enable cyclists. The affect of gradients is applied in the same
the setting of intergreen times under normal conditions manner as `Cyclists Travelling at Speed' above.
where a cyclist enters the intersection at the time that
the `yellow' lamp appears. In assessing uphill grades, the approach road conditions
must be considered. Long and steep gradients in advance
of an intersection may be such that cyclists would not
Speed (km/h)
I ................
have recovered physically by the time they cross the inter-
[Median 25 section, and hence their speed will be relatively slow.
I
15'' Percentile 20 The effect of wind on the speed of cyclists may also be
important in some locations.
Source: Shepherd 1994; Dorrestyn & Co., 1998
Table 5-2 : Cyclists' Speed at Traffic Signals There is limited information available to determine the
speed of cyclists for uphill gradients and wind. An
Cyclist Travelling from Rest (refer Figure 5-22) - to approach reported in CROW (1993) can be used, from
ensure the combination of the green and intergreen which the speed of cyclists is calculated based on the
time is sufficient for a cyclist accelerating from rest (at power output of cyclists and the various forces of resis-
the stop bar) in order to clear the intersection safely. tance. Alternatively, where the uphill gradient is in excess
of 2% or wind is a factor, it is recommended the speed of

cyclists be measured on site.
The effects of gradient and wind may either increase or

tine to Travel from Rest (sec)
reduce the Intersection Crossing Time for individual phases.
5.5. Unsignalised Intersections

Traffic lanes for bicycles should be carried through
unsignalised intersections as described in Section 5.3.
However, typical of cases which require special consider-
ation are:
35 45 55 65 75
Distance (m)
5.5.1. Left Turn Slip Lanes
Figure 5-22: Cyclists'Acceleration at Traffic Signals
Approaches to left turn slip lanes may create serious con-
Gradient & Direction of Travel (Uphill or Downhill) - flict points between cyclists and left turning motor vehi-
in the absence of more accurate information, the speed cles. The distance over which the conflict occurs depends
of cyclists travelling downhill àt speed' can be on the design of the left turn slip lane and the facility pro-
obtained from Figure 5-23, where free flow conditions vided for the cyclist.
exist for cyclists, i.e. where conditions on the approach
At locations where there are long deceleration or acceler-
to, and through the intersection, do not slow cyclists
ation tapers, large radius curves and high motor vehicle
significantly. The figure was derived from several speeds, experienced cyclists will continue along the edge
sources to assist in the determination of cyclist's of the through lane. A bicycle lane should be marked
through these diverge and merge areas to increase
motorists awareness of cyclists by defining clearly the
path to be used by cyclists. However, when turning traffic
volumes are heavy and traffic speed high, cyclists may
prefer a safer option whereby they travel along the left
Speed (km/h)
hand side of the left turn lane to a point opposite the island
before crossing the slip lane at right angles.
The use of a contrasting coloured pavement surface in the

area of the bicycle lane is highly desirable to raise the level
of awareness of cyclists amongst traffic using slip lanes.
In most instances any measures to reduce the speed of traf-

fic using slip lanes would be desirable from the perspec-
Figure 5-23: Cyclists' Speed on Downhill Gradients tive of cyclists, including:
62 BICYCLES
high entry angle left slip lanes, which also provide for carriageway must, somehow, weave through the high
improved visibility of cyclists as well as other traffic; volume of left turning traffic. If an exclusive bicycle lane is
and provided between the auxiliary lane and the adjacent
through lane cyclists will be sandwiched between fast
limiting the radius of left slip lanes.
moving through traffic on the right and accelerating traffic
An alternative treatment for inexperienced cyclists would on the left. They will have to pass through the merge area,
be to provide a short section of shared path. the location where the left turning traffic is travelling
fastest. An alternative treatment that might be considered is
Selection of an appropriate treatment depends on the road
shown in Figure 5-26. This treatment requires cyclists to
space available and the type of cyclist being catered for
cross the slip lane close to the intersection where the speed
(e.g. children, inexperienced commuter). A treatment for
of left turning motor vehicles is lower, and enter a protect-
experienced cyclists is illustrated in Figure 5-24.
ed bicycle lane similar to that shown in Figure 5-27. As
In some instances, and particularly where child cyclists there is no need to yield to a cyclist, motor vehicles may
are present or there are large pedestrian volumes, it may be flow freely into the auxiliary lane.
Preft"ed path for cyclists

(exclusive bicycle lane)
I
Alternative treatment
for inexperien
cyclists (shared path)
ii
Consideration should be given ,_...
to reconstructing the slip lane
to intersect at a higher angle
Figure 5-24: High Speed Left Turn Slip Lanes
appropriate to provide a signalised crossing at the slip

lane, connecting with adjacent paths.
Where funds permit, consideration should be given to

removing the long merge taper so that the slip lane inter-
sects the through carriageway at a higher angle as shown
in Figure 5-12. These treatments are appropriate, particu-
larly in urban areas, where the high entry angle left turn
slip lane reduces the speed of the left turning vehicles and
the length over which the conflict with the cyclist occurs.
In these locations the continuation of the bicycle lane by
continuity lane lines is also appropriate.
Another difficult and hazardous situation for cyclists arises

where a left turn slip lane leads into an auxiliary lane, a
treatment provided to enable a high volume of left turning
motorists to accelerate and merge with traffic using the Figure 5-25: Exclusive Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Left Turn Lane
intersecting road. A cyclist travelling on that intersecting (Campbelltown, NSW)
$ cycle P t Symbol
i t
Medion Slot / Path
Protected Bicycle lore -
II
Figure 5-26: Treatment of Free Flow Left Turn Lane
cyclists were responsible for 16% of the crashes in

which they were involved.
Similarly, Allott & Lomax (UK) found cyclist crash rates

at roundabouts were up to 15 times those for cars and 2 to
3 times those for cyclists at traffic signals.
A study (Jordan 1985) of bicycle casualty crashes which

occurred at roundabouts revealed that 74% were right
angle crashes where a cyclist on a roundabout was struck
by an entering motor vehicle and that 17% of cyclist
crashes at roundabouts were at the exits.
Robinson confirmed the roundabout entry problem involv-

ing cyclists more recently with the finding that 70% of '2-
Figure 5-27: Protected Kerb Lane (Bowden, SA) party' incidents resulting in injury, involved circulating
cyclists or motorcyclists being hit by entering motorists.
5.5.2. Roundabouts These studies confirm that motorists often do not see
cyclists approaching in the roundabout or at least misjudge
5.5.2.1. General
their speed and relative position.
Roundabouts are the subject of considerable concern to The size and layout of roundabouts is a factor. In general
cyclists and as such are deserving of special consideration. small roundabouts with relatively slow traffic speeds, and
Roundabouts are a form of intersection treatment adopted with a circulating carriageway narrow enough to prevent
extensively during the 1980's on both local and arterial motor-vehicles overtaking cyclists, present no special risks
roads due to the benefit of both a relatively low crash rate for cyclists (Brude & Larsson, Van Minnen, Balsiger).
and of less severe crashes for motor vehicles than other It appears that detailed studies of roundabouts have not
types of intersections. They are an important device used been conducted accounting for the level of use of round-
by traffic engineers to physically control traffic behaviour abouts by cyclists under local conditions. Despite this, it is
and to combat road trauma and improve amenity in resi- reasonable to argue that a substantial difference in safety
dential areas. However, various studies have indicated that conditions exist for small single lane and other round-
roundabouts, particularly those which have more than one abouts in the light of overseas studies and given the lower
lane in the circulating roadway, are markedly less safe for vehicle speeds at small single lane roundabouts.
cyclists than for other road users.
Overseas research has also demonstrated that:
In a recent study of the reported crashes at roundabouts in
New South Wales by Robinson 1998 it was found: crash rates are higher where cyclists (using separated
perimeter paths) have right of way over motorists at
6% of those injured at cross intersections were cyclists roundabouts;
compared with 18% at roundabouts;
minimal crash rates have occurred at roundabouts with
at non-metropolitan roundabouts, 32% of those injured an approach traffic volume of 8000-10000 vehicles per
in 2-party crashes were cyclists; and day; and
64 BICYCLES
roundabouts with a low bicycle volume and high traf- There is substantial concern amongst cycling groups at the
fic volume have been found to be less safe for cyclists. use of the Àlberta' style of line marking (where circulat-
This is pertinent to conditions in Australia where ing area lane lines join roundabout exit lane lines)
cyclists are relatively few in number. throughout Australia at multi lane roundabouts. Various
studies are reasonably consistent in demonstrating that the
5.5.2.2. Options for the Treatment of Roundabouts predominant crash type is right angle incidents between
entering motor-vehicles and circulating cyclists.
Jordan (1985) recommended the installation of large well Therefore, it remains to be seen whether or not the safety
designed splitter islands, the careful positioning of signs of cyclists will deteriorate as a result of these markings.
and vegetation (to minimise the chance of obscuring a
cyclist), and that appropriate attention is given to approach Simultaneously, there is also concern for the safety of
deflection and adequate lighting. cyclists who attempt to turn right or travel across a round-
about exit where Àlberta' markings exist. Where a signif-
Visibility is a significant issue, and complex in relation to icant demand for these movements exists at a roundabout
cyclists. In some investigations (Hughes, 1998) higher designated with Àlberta' style markings, alternative pro-
rates of cyclist crashes at roundabouts have been reported vision for cyclists should be made.
where visibility was by normal standards at a high level. It
was also found that those rates reduced when sight dis- As a well established principle of bicycle planning, solu-
tances were reduced. The mechanics of visibility at inter- tions to roundabout problems involving cyclists are
sections and the perceptual limitations of drivers are such unlikely to be solved through attempts to divert the paths
that cyclists are easily missed when observations are made of cyclists, unless for instance, the convenience, travel
at higher speeds, which occur with high standard sight time and safety of cyclists, particularly during peak traffic
conditions. What constitutes the optimum level of visibil- periods, are all improved as a result. Similarly, it should
ity is unknown. In the absence of more exacting research, not be assumed that all cyclists will divert to alternative
it may be appropriate to achieve sight distances that corre- (separate perimeter) paths of access around roundabouts
spond to the minimum standard required by AUS- where these are provided.
TROADS Part 6.
5.5.2.3. Approach - Small Single Lane Roundabouts
The results of various studies have indicated that a sepa-
rated cycle path, located outside of the circulating car- Specific provision is not generally required at single lane
riageway, was the safest design in the presence of large roundabouts (refer Figure 5-28) with a central island
vehicle flows (Brude & Larsson, 1997). CROW 10 (1994) diameter less than 25 metres, or where vehicles speeds are
indicates off-road cycleways should be constructed at less than 50 km/h.
roundabouts with a traffic volume in excess of 10000 vehi-
cles per day and also at all large (central island diameter in At local street roundabouts cyclists are expected to inte-
excess of 25m) roundabouts, primarily due to speed con- grate with other road users by merging with motor traffic
siderations. on the approach to the roundabout and taking their turn
through the roundabout. Because of the small scale of
Separate cycle paths have been found to be safer than a these roundabouts entering motorists should readily see
bicycle lane within the road carriageway, particularly at cyclists on the circulating roadway.
highly trafficked roundabouts (Van Minnen, Brude &
Larsson).
Allott & Lomax reported that in an early attempt to pro-

vide for cyclists, a mandatory bicycle lane was marked
around the periphery of the circulating roadway of a
roundabout, giving cyclists priority across approaches
whilst other traffic had priority at the exits. A performance
study indicated that cyclists felt that their trip was
improved although crashes involving cyclists continued. It
was also reported this treatment has been withdrawn in the
absence of any detectable benefit for cyclists, due to the
fact that cyclists are kept in the outer edge, `the most haz-
ardous area of the circulatory carriageway'.
The affect of the signalisation at roundabouts has result-
ed in an overall reduction in cyclists' crashes by as much
as 66% where full time signalisation occurred on one or all
approaches (Lines 1995). Figure 5-28: Small Roundabout in Local Street
5.5.2.4. Approach - Other Roundabouts instances and particularly in the case of large round-
abouts, it would be desirable for the path to be two-way,
Special provision for cyclists is desirable where: in order to provide cyclists with a convenient choice of
the cumulative, approach traffic volume, exceeds access to the road carriageway, and hence encourage as
10000 vehicles per day; many cyclists as possible to use the facility;
multi lane roundabouts occur, and certainly where where separate provision is not possible, the use of
vehicle speeds exceed 50 km/h through the round- footpaths located adjacent to the roundabout may be
about; or appropriate, as illustrated in Figure 5-29. It shows a
treatment whereby cyclists may move between the
the central roundabout island diameter exceeds 25m. road and path via properly designed ramps (sect.
6.7.3.3). Fencing or landscaping between the path and
A combination of these factors (i.e. volume, multi-lane,
speed, size) should be considered as well as others includ-
carriageway, is necessary to prevent 'ride-out' (Cross
and Fisher, 1977);
ing sight distances and sight lines when designing for
cyclist safety.
the full-time signalisation of one or all entries to a
The following treatment is appropriate, where `special roundabout, depending on the predominant paths of
provision' should be made: cyclists and other traffic, or on the crash history;
the provision of a path of access for cyclists separated in the case of very large roundabouts on busy roads
from the road carriageway as shown in Figure 5-29 and consideration should be given to providing a controlled
detailed in Figure 5-30, as an alternative to the use of crossing on critical approaches, or grade separation
the road carriageway at the roundabout. In most where cyclist demand is very high.
Alternative shared use

path location where space
permits (re* ft. 5-M)
Ramp to allow cyclists to

exit roadway conveniently
\\
\
and safely at a speed to

I
suit podestriart traffic and

I/
abutting development
'
t//"
v2'
.
Shared use path

Provide 1.4m clearance
-
or erect fence barrier
road
Figure 5-29: Paths for Inexperienced Riders at Roundabouts

66 BICYCLES
Every effort should be made to ensure approach entry In such cases designers should consider and evaluate other
deflection angles and through path design envelope will alternative treatments for the intersection in order to pro-
limit vehicle speeds at roundabouts, despite any other vide suitable access for cyclists.
measures for the benefit of cyclists.
Where it is proposed to construct separate perimeter paths
Other situations where special consideration of cyclists is around the outside of roundabouts, or where shared use
required to assist access and safety include: paths would exist around roundabouts, consideration of
pedestrian movements is required to ensure that any
at roundabouts used by a significant number of cyclists potential conflicts are addressed. With reference to Figure
or where a safety problem has developed, considera- 5-30, where the perimeter path crosses a road, there is
tion should be given to the provision of a sign rein- some concern in relation to the safety of cyclists (and
forcing the message that motorists must look out for pedestrians) with respect to exiting traffic in particular.
and give way to cyclists moving around the round- Consideration should be given to installation of a con-
about. The sign shown in Figure 9-19 can be used in trolled crossing should a safety problem develop at a
conjunction with the standard regulatory `Roundabout' crossing location.
sign; In proposing the use of a larger roundabout road authori-
ties, engineers, planners and designers should account for
by-pass of three legged roundabouts for cyclists travel- the safety implications to cyclists as well as the safety ben-
ling straight through the intersection; efits to motorists and their passengers. It may be prefer-
able at locations used by a significant number of cyclists
where the skew of intersections necessitates provision and pedestrians to adopt a signalised intersection.
of a left turn slip lane on the corner of a roundabout;
and It would be desirable to disseminate information in the
community providing advice to cyclists on how to negoti-
where a major motor vehicle movement is able to by- ate any roundabout (Allott & Lomax), and to highlight to
pass the roundabout at speed. all road users the problems for cyclists at roundabouts.
Figure 5-30: Separate Perimeter Path Details for Roundabouts

Bypass preferred to Island extension to

Setback from ....W,,, minimise potential
main carriageway. provide continuity
of route for conflict with
Alternative to bypass
motor vehicles
a) Mid Stock Closure

t NOTE. All ramps to have

smooth inverts
i (no bulinose)
Shared paths to provide alternative

I route through intersection
t
Alternative service road ter-
minal where necessitated
by abutting development
b) Termination at major intersection
Figure 5-31: Treatment at Service Road Closures

68 BICYCLES
5.5.3. Service Road Treatments

Where service roads exist adjacent to a main carriageway
and the service roads are to be treated with closures to dis-
courage through traffic or to improve operations at a major
intersection, it is desirable that the needs of cyclists be
considered. This is particularly important where a bicycle
route is defined along the service road and cyclists need
continuity of the route through closures and major inter-
sections. Cyclists may be provided for by setting the clo-
sure back from the main carriageway to enable cyclists to
`slip' past the closure or by providing a `by-pass' near the
footpath. A by-pass would not normally be favoured
unless it is raised (and hence self-cleaning) or there is a
commitment to keep it well maintained and free of debris.
Consideration should also be given to the need for a shared
path alternative adjacent to major intersections for inexpe-
rienced cyclists. Typical treatments are illustrated in
Figure 5-3 1.
Consideration could be given to the following, in associa-

tion with long service roads with limited cross traffic:
contra-flow bicycle lanes where the service road is for

one-way traffic; and
utilisation of that section of the road reserve between

the service road and main carriageway, for the con-
struction of a path for cyclists.
69
6.1. General Users with Disabilities (vision, hearing mobility, & cogni-
tively impaired users):
Paths are often constructed through reserves, or along pedestrians;
rivers or coastal areas, and thus offer pleasant and the least sporting users;
stressful of conditions for cycling. As such they play a crit- manual wheelchair users; and
ical role in recreational cycling. electric wheelchair/scooter users.
They present ideal environments for children, adult 'learn- Small-Wheeled Vehicle Users:
ers' and others to improve their cycling in the absence of children's pedal/motorised/electric cars;
motor traffic. in-line skaters;
skate boarders;
Conversely paths can have a critical transportation role
roller skaters; and
where, for instance, they form part of a strategic bicycle
foot scooters.
route, or are used to avoid limitations caused by discon-
tinuous access along roads, excessive gradients or unde- Others:
sirable traffic conditions (also see Figure 6-15). organised events;
maintenance workers;
Paths can offer a safe functional design suitable for use by
horse riders; and
a variety of cyclist categories and purposes where there is:
anglers.
a professional approach to planning and implementa-
If the facility is intended for use by commuter cyclists then
tion;
it should follow a direct route to a popular destination, be
an appreciation of the need for appropriate geometric wide and have a horizontal and vertical alignment which
design and layout; and allows safe, high speed bicycle travel. Rail reserves and
river banks can offer an opportunity to provide a high
recognition of the dynamic nature of cycling. quality commuter path. Provision of an exclusive bicycle
path can often, but not always, mean that a separate paral-
6.2. Characteristics of Use lel facility has to be provided to meet the demands of
pedestrians and other potential users.
Where sufficient demand exists, paths should be provided
for the exclusive use of cyclists and pedestrians. Separated Because cyclist demand is often relatively low, the cost of
paths may reduce the potential for conflict and allow the paths significant and many paths provide useful and
bicycle path section to operate at a reasonable speed. attractive links for pedestrians, there has been a tendency
for 'shared-use' paths to be provided rather than exclusive
An indication of the extent of other users normally found bicycle paths. Whilst this enables the maximum benefit to
on shared use paths may be gathered from the following be derived from these facilities, conflict does occur
list. The categories include: between cyclists and other users, particularly pedestrians,
and this has become an issue on some busy paths. For this
Pedestrians:
reason a `Separated Path' which divides the operating
children; space for each use, or where completely separate facilities
elderly; are provided, may be appropriate where both cyclist and
people pushing prams & strollers; pedestrian (or other user) demands are heavy.
family groups;
dog walkers; and In some States or Territories cyclists are permitted to ride
joggers. on footpaths whereas in others footpaths must be signed as
shared use paths before cyclists are able to use them legal-
Cyclists (refer Section 2.3 also): ly. The issue of footpath cycling is one that must be
children; addressed by the individual authorities responsible for
families; traffic regulation.
adults;
individuals & groups; and Although they can be designed for high speeds, many
power assisted bicycles. paths are not used by inter-suburb distance commuter
70 BICYCLES
cyclists. This is mainly due to cyclists inability to travel bicycle, purpose of the trip, age of the cyclist, condition of
constantly at the relatively high speed attainable on the surface, alignment standard of facility, gradients, widths,
road system, and because paths often do not lead to useful path user volumes and prevailing weather conditions.
destinations. Indirect paths bring cyclists into conflict with
other users, and cause them to have to yield at side streets. It is important to recognise that, given appropriate condi-
tions, many fit cyclists can maintain relatively high
These factors can result in speeds being low and overall speeds. Speeds of 35 km/h can be maintained on the flat
travel times being relatively long, and unattractive to com- whilst speeds of over 50 km/h can be attained on moder-
muter cyclists. Thus paths should not be regarded as a sub- ate gradients.
stitute for adequately designing roads for travel by bicycle.
It is recommended that paths be designed for a speed of 30
In designing an off-carriageway facility for bicycles, the km/h (Shepherd, 1994) where possible and desirable given
designer should first determine the purpose of the cycling the purpose of the path, and otherwise for the anticipated
path. The purpose of a path is best assessed through con- operating speeds.
sideration of the potential, likely and desired use of the
path amongst the various categories of cyclists. However, it should be recognised that it may be necessary
Predominantly, a path for cycling may either lead to spe- to adopt higher or lower design speeds in specific circum-
cific destinations (a commuter path) or offer a pleasant stances. For example, it is desirable to provide a high stan-
ride (a recreational path). dard curve at the bottom of a steep downgrade but design-
ers may be forced to adopt tight curves in providing a path
With reference to Section 6.4, the detailed designs of com-
down the face of an escarpment.
muter and recreational paths can be quite different.
Crashes and even fatalities occur on paths and may be the 6.3.2. Horizontal Curvature
result of high density use or, as a result of the mixed use
by leisure and commuting traffic. Careful consideration of Where a path location or alignment is not constrained by
separated paths for differing user needs may be required to topography or other physical features, a generous align-
minimise risk within limited budgets. ment consisting of straights and large radius curves is
desirable. Such an alignment will provide good sight lines
and a pleasant riding experience for cyclists. A minimum
radius of at least 30 metres is generally preferred.
Where the choice of alignment is restrained by topography

or physical features (e.g. trees) such that it is not possible
to achieve a curve having radii greater than 15 metres,
Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 should be used as a guide to the
acceptable, minimum radii and superelevations.
It is acknowledged that a curvilinear alignment is often

preferred to achieve a visually pleasing path and environs.
However, curves with a radius less than 15 metres are gen-
erally considered to be `sharp' and should not be used to
achieve landscaping objectives to the detriment of the path
Figure 6-1: Path at Squeeze Point operation for cyclists.
6.3. Path Design Criteria for Bicycles It should be noted that there will be circumstances where
the speed environment along a path or a section of path is
The vertical and horizontal alignment (and combinations of high and as above, Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 should be used
these), width of path and clearances adopted, are vital to as a guide for the choice of radii in those circumstances.
the safe operation of a path. Paths attract a variety of users
from experienced commuter cyclists to young children Design Speed (k Minimum Radius (metres)
(sect. 2.3 and 6.2) and hence it is desirable to consider the
characteristics of all likely users when designing a path . 20 10
The following sections provide a broad guide to appropri- 30 25

a
ate values to be used in the design of paths.
40 50
1 J
6.3.1. Bicycle Operating Speeds 50 94
Bicycle operating speeds on paths are influenced by a com- Table 6-1: Minimum Radii of Horizontal Curves
bination of human and other factors including the type of (without Superelevation)
PATHS 71
A small radius may be appropriate on the approach to inter- b) Speed of cyclists

sections (5.0 metres e.g. Figure 6-29) and at `hairpin' bends
(2.5 metres min.) of paths traversing steeply sloping land. Higher bicycle speeds (30 km/h +) are likely where
paths:
are direct between significant work destinations;
6.3.3. Capacity of Paths
are used for intense exercise e.g. circuit training;
The capacity of a 1.5 metre wide path in one direction is have a high standard of geometric alignment; or
in the order of 150 cyclists per hour. In general this width have gradients.
is sufficient for the passage of a single stream of cyclists.
Lower bicycle speeds are likely where paths:
Generally it is impractical to design for the peak annual or experience high use;
lifetime use of a path. For many paths the nature of use have a circuitous or indirect alignment;
varies over the period of a day or week. In considering the have regular sharp curves; and
suitability of a path to handle the anticipated number of are located where only recreational use is likely.
cyclists, and pedestrians if appropriate, it is recommended
that path volumes be assessed on the basis of the highest c) traffic regime - In some instances it is important to
demand over the period of 2 separate hours of a typical determine if a path is likely to be subject to tidal flows
day (weekday or weekend). or to concurrent travel in both directions. Given the rel-
atively low use of paths, tidal flows are a consideration
In the case of shared use paths, the volume of pedestrians only where they are narrow, or in the case of very heav-
can be added to that of cyclists. Opportunities for passing ily used paths. Alternatively, for example, it is impor-
would be required either through the provision of addi- tant to know whether the path is likely to be used by
tional path width (minimum width of 1.8 - 2.0 metres in service vehicles.
each direction), or through passing on the side of the path
with opposing flow provided sufficient opportunities exist. d) Clearances (see sect. 6.3.5) - represent a critical con-
sideration in the assessment of path width requirements.
6.3.4. Width of Paths However, for the purpose of determining path widths, it
is reasonable for some clearance allowances (e.g.
The width of paths is an important factor given construc-
between users) to be ignored where paths are subject to
tion costs and operational considerations. It can also have
low use or where path traffic flows are tidal. This is rea-
a significant bearing on the level of convenience and con-
sonable on the basis that path users meet infrequently
flict between users (sect. 6.6.1), and potentially on path
and therefore the potential for conflict is limited.
safety as well.
The process of choosing the width of a path is subjective e) User ènvelopes' - includes the operating width of
in most instances given that the path would not be in exis- cyclists (see Figure 3-1), pedestrians and others. Note,
tence at the time of the path design, and as such it is likely the presence of couples walking side by side is a
that little relevant information would be available on its common occurrence along paths used for recreation,
use. Therefore some basic assumptions need to be made and one which is commonly associated with the high-
anticipating the nature of use of the path. A number of est demand for path width. For the purpose of deter-
issues should be considered, including: mining path widths, the design envelope can be taken
as 1.0 metre wide for pedestrians (AUSTROADS, Part
a) Level of pedestrian and bicycle use - paths can expe- 13), and 1.5 metres wide for a pedestrian couple.
rience significant use:
where they are located within urban areas, near The issues and advice provided above are a guide only.
schools or other major bicycle or pedestrian trip More exacting methods are available in relation to some of
generators; the issues. Other local issues and constraints may also
exist and may need to be considered. Specific assessment
where they provide an opportunity for recreation should be made in each case.
and exercise;
In general the stated issues have been considered in the
due to visual and other attractions; or development of the path treatment widths listed in this
where they provide useful connections within a chapter (see Figure 6-19, Figure 6-25 and Figure 6-28).
comprehensive bicycle network.
Separate consideration should be given to the varying cir-
However the capacity of even a common 3 metre path is cumstances of use of paths that exist on weekends and
significant and rarely exceeded due to path traffic volumes weekdays. For instance, lower bicycle speeds are conceiv-
alone, and therefore in most instances detailed considera- able during weekends along paths having recreational
tion of path traffic volumes is not required. value, which are used for commuting on weekdays.
72 BICYCLES
6.3.5. Clearances for use on paths. However, in practice there are cases
where it is not feasible to achieve a 3% maximum and
Adequate horizontal clearance between bicycle operating the designer has no choice but to adopt a steeper gra-
spaces and fixed objects is important for safe operation. dient; and
The horizontal clearance varies according to the type of
use and operating speeds as follows: in cases where 3% cannot be achieved consider limit-
ing gradient to a maximum of about 5% and providing
a desirable lateral clearance of 1.0 metre is required short flatter sections (say 20 metres long) at regular
between bicycle operating spaces because of the high intervals to give cyclists travelling both uphill and
relative speed which exists when cyclists approach one
downhill some relief from the gradient (although many
another from opposite directions at speeds of 30 km/h cyclists are opposed to this approach, preferring a con-
or more (i.e. closing speed of 60 km/h); sistent gradient).
on recreational paths and shared use paths where the
It is sometimes difficult to achieve the above gradients
speeds of most cyclists are generally about 20 km/h, a
where a path follows a river and a connection between
minimum lateral clearance of 0.4 metres is necessary
paths must be achieved in the vicinity of a steep escarp-
between bicycle operating spaces;
ment. It should also be noted that a long uphill grade pre-
a lateral clearance of 1.0 metres (0.5 metres minimum) ceded by a downgrade is more acceptable than one pre-
should be provided between the edge of any path for ceded by a flat or slightly rising grade.
cycling and any obstacle, which if struck may result in
Note, with regard to Figure 6-2, gradients and the associ-
cyclists losing control or being injured;
ated length would normally be based on the distance

Such obstacles include bushes, trees and large rocks between the tangent points for an isolated steep section.
used in landscaping. Provided the design and end However, where there are consecutive grades of varying
treatments are appropriate (sect. 7.6.2), or where steepness (all uphill) or large radius vertical curves, these
extenuating circumstances exist, a lesser clearance should be calculated based on the intersection points of the
may be acceptable for fences and other obstacles with respective vertical curves.
similar `smooth features' aligned parallel to the path
(0.3 metres absolute minimum).
In general, the àcceptable' line in the figure would be sat-
isfactory for paths with a high proportion of regular or
These horizontal clearances are partially illustrated in physically fit cyclists, which in most instances would
Figure 3-1.
The minimum vertical clearance required by cyclists is 2.4

metres, measured above the riding surface (also shown in 1
Figure 3-1). This applies to tree branches, underpasses,

doorways, sign structures and any other overhead structure. - - - Acceptable
K
Desirable
6.3.6. Gradient
140
As a general principle longitudinal gradients on paths for
adient (m)
cycling should be as flat as possible. The potential hazard E 120

P a
for cyclists due to high speeds on steep down grades is as

important as the difficulty of riding up the grade, when
determining maximum gradients on two way paths.
Where paths are for shared use, the needs of other path
users should be considered. AS 1428 has specific require-
ments relating to the longitudinal gradient of paths. For 60
i
further details on pedestrian facilities and requirements
AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians, should be consulted. 40
20
6.3.6.1. Ease of Uphill Travel
Figure 6-2 shows the maximum lengths of uphill gradient 0

acceptable to cyclists. The figure is based on a review of 0 5 10 15
the ease of uphill travel by O'Brien & Assoc (1996). Gradient (% )
In using the figure designers should understand that: Preferred maximum gradient for downhill safety
above 3% the acceptable length reduces rapidly and it

is considered this is the desirable maximum gradient Figure 6-2: Desirable Uphill Gradients for Ease of Cycling
PATHS 73
include commuter and sporting cyclists. Otherwise, the not be provided at the bottom of steep grades, except in
`desirable' line in the figure is recommended. extreme circumstances. If these cannot be avoided then it
is important that adequate sight distances be provided on
Consideration of the following factors is also important: all approaches.
cyclists' speeds on approach to an uphill section;
6.3.7. Sight Distance
exposure to wind; and
For safe travel cyclists must be able to see across the
width of path - where the gradients provided in the inside of horizontal curves and over vertical crest curves a
figure cannot be achieved it may be desirable to widen sufficient distance to enable them to stop or take evasive
the path to cater for the sideways displacement of bicy- action if necessary to avoid another cyclist, a pedestrian or
cles being ridden uphill, or to allow for cyclists walk- an obstacle in their path.
ing side by side.
Figure 6-3: Cyclist on Gradient Figure 6-4: Sight Distance Problem
6.3.6.2. Safety and Downhill Travel on Paths Figure 6-6 gives stopping sight distances required to
enable a cyclist to stop for various combinations of bicy-
State Bicycle Committee of Victoria (1987b) states: cle operating speeds and gradients. The table is based on a
`Many existing bicycle facilities have gradients coefficient of friction of 0.25 and a perception/reaction
which require riding skills beyond those of most time of 2.5 seconds. The eye height of the cyclist is
assumed to be 1.4 metres and the object height is assumed
recreational and child cyclists when they are riding
down the grade. ........... As a guide, a gradient to be zero to recognise that impediments to bicycle travel
exist at pavement level.
greater than 10% over 50 m with horizontal curves
or a gradient of 12% over 50 m on a straight path Paths should be designed and constructed to provide the
is considered to be extremely hazardous.' greatest sight distance possible at any given location.
However, there has in fact been limited comprehensive The stopping sight distance to be used in the geometric
research to determine what constitutes the maximum design of paths should be at least equal to that shown in
downhill grade, in terms of cyclist safety. It is known that Figure 6-6, and in particular should be used:
cyclists have been seriously injured because they have lost
control of bicycles on steep downgrades and run into for intersection design;
obstacles off the path. in setting out the alignment of paths;
in relation to the positioning of terminals and
It is recommended that gradients steeper than 5% should not handrails;
be provided unless it is unavoidable. It is also most impor- at entries to underpasses;
tant that sharp horizontal curves or fixed objects do not exist for landscaping in the field; and
near the bottom of hills, particularly where the approach gra- otherwise as required to ensure the safety of path users.
dient is steep (greater than 5%) and relatively straight.
Note, path sight distances can be drastically reduced by
If a curve must be provided at the bottom of a steep grade the growth of vegetation and hence their maintenance is
then consideration should be given to providing addition- critical (see Figure 6-4).
al path width, and a clear escape route or recovery area
adjacent to the outside of the path curve. Figure 6-5 illustrates the relationship between stopping
sight distance, radius of the curve and the lateral clearance
Intersecting paths, underpass access points and other cir- to significant visibility obstructions such as extensive veg-
cumstances that may result in conflict for cyclists, should etation or an earth embankment. Isolated features including
74 BICYCLES
trees do not necessarily constitute a significant obstruction in opposite directions around a curve. Where such provi-
if cyclists can see most of the curve beyond them. sion is impractical, one or a combination of the following
may be appropriate:
Whilst the figures referred to above are exacting guides in
the determination of sight distance requirements, in many widening of path;
instances it may be convenient to seek a minimum sight
warning signs; or
distance of say, 30 metres. Such a dimension could be pro-
vided to works staff to be used to assess the need for rou- tactile linework.
tine maintenance operations and the like.
A vertical curve should join all changes of grade. Crest ver-
Where a path is narrow and the level of use of a path is tical curves must be of sufficient length to give the cyclist
high such that cyclists may be expected to travel in both the stopping sight distance shown in Figure 6-6. Sag curves
directions across the width at coincident periods (i.e. 'non- should, where practicable, be the same length as equivalent
tidal' flow), it may be desirable in some instances to cal- crest curves to ensure comfort and a good appearance.
culate lateral clearances on horizontal curves based on the Figure 6-7 shows the minimum length of vertical curve for
sum of the stopping sight distances for cyclists travelling various changes of gradient and design speeds.
Pot of cyast
pa th ) ,
NOTE; L of sight is
600mm dove cwtm line of
Im, point of
cs ion. Obs ton
c ca
2
T-f
1
I
117
l z 8.120
10.0 30.0 40,0 150.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Stopping Sight Dis (metres, see 6g.6.6)
Samoa: MSMTO (7997)
Figure 6-5: Lateral Clearances on Horizontal Curves

PATHS 75
16.0
Gradient (%)
Minimum Stopping Sight Distance (metres)

Figure 6-6: Minimum Stopping Sight Distances
16
Algebraic Change in Grade (%)
14
12
10
8 I
0 I I __
I i I I I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Minimum Length of Vertical Curve (metres)

Source: Californian Department of Transportation
Figure 6-7. Minimum Length of Crest Vertical Curves
6.3.8. Superelevation, Crossfall & Drainage above the adjacent land, but designers should ensure that
the path shoulders are matched to the path surface level
Paths for cycling should be constructed so that water does and graded with a suitable crossfall (preferably flatter than
not pond on the surface and debris does not wash onto the 1 vert. in 8 horiz.).
path during heavy rain. To achieve this the path should
have adequate crossfall and catch drains to collect water. Paths for cycling should be constructed so that they are not
In flat terrain it may be adequate to simply elevate the path subject to flooding due to a 2 year average recurrence
76 BICYCLES
interval flow in drains. Where significant lengths of path In so far as the needs of cyclists are concerned, curves
are constructed to a lesser standard, signs should be erect- should have positive superelevation in accordance with
ed warning of any risk (e.g. as shown in Figure 7-9). Table 6-2 so that they can be comfortably negotiated.
Where paths have to pass under structures and head room On straight sections crowning of the pavement is prefer-
is limited necessitating the level of the path being below able as it results in less accumulation of debris. On sealed
the flood level, it may be possible to construct a flood wall surfaces a crossfall of 2% - 4% should be adequate to
between the path and the river to hold back water during effectively dispose of surface water whereas unsealed sur-
minor flood events. In extreme conditions the water over- faces may require 5% to prevent puddles of water from
tops the wall and flows along the path. developing. Catch drains will often be required on the
inside of curves as will pipes to carry water under the path.
Superelevation On large radius curves (100 metres, say) an adverse super-
elevation of 2% may be provided to avoid the need for the
2 3 1 4 1 5 6 catch drain and pipes. However, this should only be done
where the catchment area above the path is relatively small
Minimum Radius (metres) and has a surface stable enough that debris is unlikely to
wash over the path. Figure 6-8 shows typical cross sec-
10 9 9 9 9
tions of paths for cycling.
24 23 22 21 21
Where paths are for shared use, the needs of other path
users should be considered. AS 1428 specifies that path
47 45 43 42 41
crossfalls should in general not exceed 1%, and that steep-
86 82 1 79 76 73 er crossfalls up to 2.5% may be acceptable in some
instances. For further details on pedestrian facilities and
Source: Californian Dept. of Transportation (1995)
requirements AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians, should
Table 6-2: Superelevation at Curves be consulted. With reference to Table 6-2 there is limited
,5m
I I I
A. Devoted path in flat terrain
Non-erodioq surface
Swrde and catch dram B. Path where

to caket watts' and debris
C. Path where ex stiro" terrain exceeds path crosafaa (with amt)
Catch dram to caved

Discharge water and debris
to $uit
D. Path an a curve
Refer to text for path crpasfat details.
Figure 6-8: Drainage and Crossfall Requirements

PATHS 77
value in using higher rates of superelevation, and as such be readily accessible;

it is generally preferable to use a low path crossfall and
thereby accommodate the needs of a range of path users. include such facilities as toilets, drinking water foun-
tains, car, and bicycle parking; and
6.4. Path Function have adequate signing to destinations, at junctions, and

at points of discontinuity along the route.
6.4.1. Utility & Commuter Use
The characteristics of a successful recreational path for
Commuters will want to travel as fast as conditions allow. cycling are illustrated in Figure 6-11.
It is important therefore that paths provided for long dis-
tance commuting have the best possible alignment and are
6.5. Location of Paths for Cycling
designed to cater for the anticipated speed of cyclists (sect.
6.3.1). Paths may be located:
Such paths should: in the reservations of major new or existing access

controlled arterial roads or freeways;
lead to useful destinations;
along river frontages;
allow safe travel at a constant speed appropriate to the
use; and foreshores;
achieve a specific purpose such as providing a short cut

through parkland;
or a by-pass of a busy section of road.
along railway reservations; or
The characteristics of a successful path for commuting or
utility cycling use are illustrated in Figure 6-10. within the reservations of streets which have direct
access to abutting property.
Therefore paths may either have very limited motor vehi-

cle access across them or they may have driveways cross-
ing at frequent intervals.
Where paths have very limited motor vehicle access across

them bicycle speeds are likely to be relatively high
(greater than 30 km/h) and it is most important to provide
a high design standard with respect to width, surface con-
dition, gradient and alignment.
6.5.1. Factors of Influence - Path Location

Factors that influence the location of paths are:
Figure 6-9: Path for Commuters (Adelaide, SA)
the need to:
6.4.2. Recreational Bicycle Use - achieve the best alignment possible, within reason,
A recreational path is a path that may be located along the to allow cyclists to travel safely at their chosen
coastline, a river foreshore, or along a linear public open speed. Cost may be a factor in the choice of align-
space corridor. These locations attract recreational users ment but in general the design speed of paths
due to their scenic nature and possibly flat grades. should satisfy the advice provided in Section 6.3.1;
Although provided mainly for recreational use, such paths
- avoid sharp horizontal curves, particularly at the
often attract commuters during some periods of the week.
bottom of steep downgrades;
A path designed for recreation should:
- achieve adequate sight distance across the inside of
offer an attractive and enjoyable ride of at least 10 min- curves;
utes duration (i.e. at least 3 kilometres in length);
- optimise the personal security of users of paths
where possible, generally have flat gradients to better located in relatively isolated areas; and
provide for children and novice adult cyclists;
accommodate Emergency Service vehicles at path
have few road crossings; entrances or other strategic points.
78
BICYCLES
Figure 6-10: Characteristics of Successful Commuter Path for Cycli

Convenient access to path

by train, car and bicycle
Signposts to path
Grade separated
A ss points to or controlled
path Parking for cars crossings of
major roads and
some collector
P4 roads
Pleasant scen
PATHS
Bicycles available for hire

Path smooth, continuous and
having suitable design features
Figure 6-11: Characteristics of Successful Recreation Path for Cycling

Path operation monitored
Regular maintenance
and auditing of the path
Destinations-shelter, water, toilets, barbecue,
playground, bicycle parking, kiosk, shops
79
80 BICYCLES
trates the way in which such a shift should be achieved.
Factors which influence the choice of alignment are dis-

cussed below.
A path located close to the kerb:
in many cases is the only option because of the road

reserve width available;
offers the best visibility of path users to drivers revers-

ing out of their properties, particularly where high
screen walls exist at the boundaries;
will be used in two directions and allows cyclists to run

Figure 6-12: Recreation Path (Fremantle, WA) off the path and ride against the flow of motor traffic
on the road pavement. Overseas experience has shown
wrong way movements to be a major problem, (Cross
landscaping and planting considerations including
and Fisher, 1977);
vegetation removal, planting sizes at maturity and
maintaining adequate sight distances and accumula- may result in parked cars being a hazard to cyclists due
tion of debris; to the opening of vehicle doors into the path;
owners of private property abutting the reservation, follows the longitudinal profile of the kerb and is
who may be concerned that provision of a path will therefore generally cheaper to construct because of
adversely affect privacy or the security of their reduced earthworks;
property; and
may be preferred by abutting land owners in terms of
the possible advantages that can be derived from inci-
privacy and nature strip disruption;
dental lighting from fixed sources or motor vehicles.
may result in the effective path width being reduced by
6.5.2. Factors Influencing Roadside Alignment kerb returns (however the use of AS 1428 style side
ramps would be some assistance - see sect. 6.7.3.3) at
Where a path is located in a road reserve and abutting driveways or the path profile being adversely affected
development results in driveways at frequent intervals, a at the cross over;
choice may exist between locating the path adjacent to the
property boundary, locating it adjacent to the kerb or if wide, may be viewed as detracting from the appear-
locating it at an intermediate point, say 1.5 metres behind ance of the streetscape and may imply a higher speed
the kerb. However, in many cases the nature strip will be environment;
too narrow to allow a choice in location of a path.
is less pleasant for cyclists because of traffic noise,
The overriding consideration in determining the location of fumes and speed, and perhaps the splashing of water
a path should be the safety of the path users. For this reason from gutters; and
it is recommended that the path be located to adequately
achieve both clearance from road traffic and clearance may be relatively unaffected by the presence of fences
from the property line to achieve adequate sight distance varying in height and type, or having sharp or exposed
for vehicles and pedestrians leaving driveways and gate- edges or protrusions.
ways. Figure 6-13 provides guidance on desirable clear-
ances for paths located within the road reserves of typical A path located near the property boundary:
urban arterial roads. Wider clearances or physical barriers
provides a more pleasant cycling environment and is
(including landscaping) may be appropriate where:
perceived to be safer for inexperienced or young
the kerbside lane is heavily trafficked; cyclists;
high road speed limits exist (e.g. 80 km/h and above); may limit visibility of path users to drivers reversing
or out of driveways;
child or inexperienced cyclists regularly use the path. does not necessarily follow the kerb profile and may
result in steeper gradients for cyclists or be more costly
It will often be necessary for a path alignment to shift to construct;
between the road reserve boundary and the kerb in order
to retain vegetation, avoid obstacles, utilise bridges or con- may be viewed as having a lower negative visual
nect to pedestrian crossings of the road. Figure 6-14 illus- impact on the street than a kerbside path;
PATHS 81
varies from zero. Provides essential cl

Desirable to have minimum of to parked and moving vehicles.
1.5m where boundary fence is Path avoids kerb returns at
high and driveways exist. ays.
Figure 6-13: Location of Path in Road Reserve

may be unacceptable to abutting land owners; Similarly, it may also be acceptable to locate a path for
cycling in an outer separator of a major road, which may
is more efficient for the mail service, if the nature strip be the most appropriate option depending on site condi-
is very wide; and tions and traffic conditions.
should preferably be deviated to a location at least one

car length back from road intersections, adjacent to 6.6. Types of Paths for Cycling
which the path crosses, to facilitate passage behind a
The types of paths for cycling available are termed:
queued car (see also sect. 5.3.5 and sect. 6.7.2.4).
Shared Use;
Where paths cross driveways there is often potential for
confusion as to who has right of way; the cyclist or the Separated; and
motorist leaving a property. Where cyclists have right of
way it is important to ensure the path appears to continue Exclusive Use.
across driveways by continuing the path surfacing and/or The flow chart in Figure 6-15 is a basic guide to assist
through the use of appropriate pavement markings. designers to choose an appropriate type of path treatment,
or at least give an appreciation of the differences between
6.5.3. Paths in Medians the treatments.
Paths for cycling are not usually located in central medians. The flow chart only considers the primary factors needed
This is generally undesirable because motorists do not expect to determine the type of treatment required. As for the
cyclists at median openings and therefore cyclists may be put associated guide charts for the choice of cycling facilities,
at risk, and also because a cyclist having an origin and a des- in this document (refer Figure 2-4 and Figure 4-1), there
tination on the same side of the road is encouraged to cross are other issues, constraints and practices that will have a
the carriageway twice to access the path. However, it may be bearing on the decision making process.
acceptable to locate a path in a median where:
Notes (Figure 6-15):
the median is wide and the outer verges narrow; 1. The level of demand can be assessed generally on the
basis of the peak periods of a typical day as follows:
the spacing of intersections is large;
Low demand: Infrequent use of path (say less than
the speed environment of the road is low; 10 users per hour);
motor vehicles are required to give way or stop for path High demand: Regular use in both directions of
users; and/or travel (say more than 50 users per hour).
safe crossings of the carriageways and intersections 2. These path volumes are suggested in order to limit the
can be made (e.g. traffic volumes low to moderate, incidence of conflict between users, and are significant-
major intersections controlled by traffic signals). ly lower than the capacity of the principal path types.
82 BICYCLES
Obstacle or
Path poor verge conditions
Property Boundary
Road Kerb
UNACCEPTABLE r, clears s inadequate, costs will cut corners.

Obstacle or
Pat poor verge conditions
Road
ACCEPTABLE
Good alignment with adequate clearances to kerb and Mperty boundary.
Source B I Kf:W i LSf, Dept of Transport, W.A.
Figure 6-14: Integrating a Shared Path with Existing Tree Planting and Obstacles
or;
for connections to strategic

routes;
for connectivity in general;
Is there an alternative Exclusive Bicycle Path
as an option for op;ftm at
path or route available. (sect. 6.6.3)
`squeeze points';
achieve a shorter route for
cyclists;
to avoid one or several road
intersections;
for recreation (e.g. a connection
in a rese n);
achieve sale access
Dolls;
as an alternative route for child,
recreational or inexperlen
costs, where no satisfactory
on-road solution exists;
to achieve convenient access
to community facilities such as
sporting centres and shopping
centres;
where no viable on-road
solution exists; or
to anist costs to avoid st
or lengthy grades.
Figure 6-15: Guide to Choice of Path Treatment for Cyclists

(See Notes on page 81)
PATHS 83
Site observations, a knowledge of existing conditions or

an appreciation for the potential path conditions (e.g.
recreational or commuting purpose of path, likelihood of
tidal flow, potential for conflict due to varied purpose of
path) will be more important than the actual number of
users in most instances.
6.6.1. Shared Use Paths

Shared use paths are the most common type of facility due
to the cost to construct separated path facilities, the limi-
tations of space and because of their versatility in provid-
ing a facility for cyclists and all the other possible users
listed in Section 6.1. Figure 6-16: Shared Use Path (WA)
The provision of a shared use path acknowledges that

Application Details
there is additional benefit to the community in allowing
other users access to the path and also the impracticability Shared use paths should be constructed in accordance with
of restricting users other than cyclists. the details shown in Table 6-3, and the associated facility
layout shown in Figure 6-17 and Figure 6-18, as appropriate.

However, there is potential for conflict between the various
users of a shared use path. To minimise this, a shared use It is recommended that shared use paths are designated
path design should be to a high standard which provides with a separation line. This is particularly beneficial where
adequate sight distance between cyclists and other users. the level of use of paths by pedestrians and cyclists is rea-
sonably high.
A shared use path may be appropriate where:
demand exists for both a pedestrian path and a bicycle Path Width (m)
path but where the intensity of use is not expected to Local Access Commuter
be sufficiently great to provide separate facilities; Path path
an existing low use footpath can be modified to pro- T sirable 2.5 3.0 3.5
J
vide for cyclists by satisfying legal requirements and
Acceptable 2.0-2.5
as necessary upgrading the surface, width and kerb Range
2,0 - 3. 3.0-4.0
ramps; and/or
Table 6-3: Shared- Use Path Dimensions
there is an existing road nearby which is available for
faster cyclists to use, to limit the extent of user conflict
The various path operational scenarios are shown in
on the shared path.
Figure 6-19. These form the basis of the widths provided
Shared use paths that utilise existing footpaths may be sat- in Table 6-3, and were developed with consideration of the
isfactory where they provide: principles outlined in Section 6.3.4.
A convenient and safe option for inexperienced With reference to Section 6.3.3, depending on the `tidal'
cyclists and young cyclists. Because footpaths usually nature of cyclist and pedestrian flows, the dimensions may
have driveway crossings or side streets intersecting at be suitable for a path capacity up to 300 cyclists and
frequent intervals they are only suitable for low pedestrians per hour, based on two principal lanes of path
cycling speeds (less than 15 km/h); or traffic.
A safer option for cyclists at squeeze points such as Designers should review the likely operational character-
istics of paths in accordance with Section 6.3.4 during the
narrow, heavily trafficked sections of road, bridges,
design process, to determine the appropriate path width.
underpasses or railway level crossings. In such cases it
is important that the connections between the footpath With reference to Figure 6-19:
and the road be properly designed so that cyclists can
leave and enter the general traffic stream safely and major recreational paths should be 4.0 metes wide to
conveniently. This can be achieved utilising kerb permit the cyclist groups/couples to pass pedestrian
ramps or driveway crossings that have a smooth invert couples or other cyclist groups, or to permit cyclists
or by constructing ramps similar to those shown in travelling in opposite directions to pass pedestrians
Figure 4-23 or Figure 4-24. with convenience and safety;
84
I
1-
ago*
BICYCLES
O)ow*dts}
Figure 6-17: Shared Use Path - Layout
Road Reserve - Layout

Figure 6-18: Shared Use Path in
86 BICYCLES
shared use paths often experience a mix of simultane- Separated paths should not be provided in busy shopping
ous commuting and recreational use and in these cir- centres where large numbers of pedestrians are expected
cumstances should have a minimum width of 3.5 to cross the path in conflict with cyclists.
metres;
2.5 and 3.0 metres are the absolute minimum widths

for paths having a predominant purpose of commuting
and recreation respectively, during periods of peak use;
2.0 metres is an acceptable path width where paths

experience very low use at all times and on all days,
where significant constraints exist limiting the con-
struction of a wider path, and may be acceptable for a
commuting path where the path user flows are highly
tidal in nature; and
3.0 metres is the minimum path width for a path where
`high' speeds (i.e. 30 km/h +) occur.
In most instances a separated path is preferred where a Figure 6-20: Separated Two-Way Path (Kangaroo Point, Qld)
combination of user volumes, clearances and other factors
indicate that the path should be constructed with a width
in excess of 4.0 metres. This is to maximise the efficient Application Details

use of the path, and to make user movements more pre-
Two way separated paths should be constructed in accor-
dictable in what may otherwise be a wide ùndefined'
pavement area.
ated facility layout shown in Figure 6-21.
6.6.2. Separated Paths
6.6.2.1. Separated Two-Way Path Path Width (m)
Description and Purpose Bicycle Path Footsath* Total
A separated path (see Figure 6-20) is a path on which [Doinble j 2.5 2.0 4.5
cyclists and pedestrians are required to use separate desig- Acceptable 2.0-3.0 ..._1,5+ 3.5+
nated areas of the path. These designated areas are created Range _.._......__
by the use of pavement markings, contrasting surfaces, *refer AUSTROADS Part 13

and the erection of regulatory signs. Typically, separated
paths are available to cyclists and pedestrians requiring Table 6-4: Separated Two-Way Path Dimensions
access in both directions. Separated paths that are avail-
able to cyclists travelling in only one direction are dis- The various path operational scenarios are shown in
cussed in detail in Section 6.6.2.2. Figure 6-28 (for the cyclists' section of the path), as
described in Section 6.6.3. These form the basis of the
Separated paths are not common because they are gener- widths provided in Table 6-4, for the cyclists' section of
ally considered to be justified only where there are large the path.
numbers of pedestrians and cyclists desiring to use the
path. Sites where a separated path is appropriate include With reference to Section 6.3.3, the dimensions are suit-
promenades along a foreshore or river frontage, and major able for a path capacity up to 300 cyclists per hour, based
inner city bridges. on two lanes of bicycle traffic, in the cyclists' section of
the path.
Because separated paths are rare, public understanding of
the correct use of them is not good. Consequently, careful Designers should review the likely operational character-
design, prominent signing and pavement symbols at close istics of paths during the design process to determine the
spacing are required. Differing pavement surfaces or appropriate path layout and width.
colours (sect. 9.7) can also be used to delineate the pedes-
Separation may be achieved in various ways as described
trian and bicycle lanes (e.g. brick pavers for pedestrians
and smooth asphalt for cyclists). in Figure 6-22. Physical horizontal or vertical separation is
preferred to line marking. Should line marking be used
Where adequate space exists and pedestrian numbers are then tactile markings are recommended. In assessing the
high a separated path may provide cyclists with an alter- need for physical separation, factors such as the speed of
native to sharing a narrow kerbside lane with motorists at cyclists as well as the potential for children to run into the
squeeze points. paths of cyclists should be considered.
PATHS
Figure 6-22: Preferred Separated Path Construction Options

87
88 BICYCLES
6.6.2.2. Separated One-Way Path Application Details
Description and Purpose Careful design, prominent pavement markings and sign-
ing, and in particular the use of distinctive pavement sur-
Where a wide nature strip exists and bicycle lanes along faces are important in the case of directional footpath
the road carriageway are not possible, consideration can treatments, as for other separated path facilities.
be given to the construction of separated one-way paths
(see Figure 6-23). Separated one-way paths should be constructed in accor-
dance with the details shown in Table 6-5 and the associ-
These paths enable bicycles to travel on the side of the ated facility layout shown in Figure 6-24. Other than in a
road, in the verge area, in one direction with bicycle move- one-way street, the treatment is used for the same of direc-
ment in the opposite direction provided on the other side tion of cyclists' travel as the adjacent traffic lane.
of the road.
Pavement symbols and arrows should be provided for both
The treatment can be advantageous when:
the pedestrian and cycle path sections.
used contiguously with other traditional bicycle lane Designers should confirm the suitability of the treatment
treatments located on roads, in order to maintain con- with respect to local regulations.
tinuous access for cyclists past squeeze points;
other constraints exist to the construction of bicycle

lanes in the carriageway; Path Width (nm)
safety problem exists for cyclists in the road carriage- Footpath* Total
way; or 1.5 3.8
high proportion of child cyclists exist. Acceptable
1.2+ I 2.4+
Range
The treatment is most appropriate where:
*refer AUSTROADS Part 13
there is a limited number of driveway crossings
Table 6-5: Separated One-Way Path Dimensions
(preferably less than one per 100m);
adequate sight lines exist, to significant road and The operation of a separated one-way path is shown in
pedestrian path access points; and Figure 6-25. This forms the basis of the widths provided in
Table 6-5, and was developed with consideration of the
suitable separation/barrier exists between the path and
the road carriageway.
principles outlined in Section 6.3.4.
With reference to Section 6.3.3, the dimensions are suit-

In addition, the discussions in Section 6.5 and details illus-
trated in Figure 6-13 are relevant to this treatment. able for a path capacity up to 150 cyclists per hour, based
on one lane of bicycle traffic (cyclists' section only).
The treatment may be preferable to shared use paths where
Designers should review the likely operational character-
`S' Lane Treatments exist (see Figure 5-20).
istics of paths during the design process to determine the
appropriate path layout and width.
With reference to Figure 6-25:
1.5 metres is the desirable width for this treatment and

is appropriate for paths used by commuter cyclists, and
where relatively high cyclist speeds (30 km/h+) exist;
1.2 metres is the absolute minimum path width and

should only be used for local access paths (where com-
muters and other higher speed cyclists are a small pro-
portion of all users), where cyclist speeds are relative-
ly low, and where the path abuts an adjoining footpath
not less than 1.2 metres wide.
Also, 2.0 metres is the maximum width that would nor-

mally be required where passing within the cyclists' path
section occurs or where it is desirable that passing
manoeuvres by cyclists occur outside of the footpath sec-
Figure 6-23: Separated One-Way Path (Salisbury Park, SA) tion of the facility.
I Y1 Y,
ADD= at )r4dm
Figure 6-24: Separated One-Way Path - Layout
In contrast to separated two-way paths, a barrier separat- With reference to Austroads Part 13, 1.2 metres is a
ing the bicycle and pedestrian path sections (see Figure common minimum width for footpaths. In the event that a
6-22) is not usually required for separated one-way paths. barrier is used to separate the bicycle and pedestrian path
However, it should be used in situations such as where sections, then a wider footpath section may be required to
path conditions are congested or where unsafe conditions allow passing manoeuvres on that section of the path,
exist due to the path users. amongst other reasons (e.g. pedestrian volumes).
90 BICYCLES
:::::I1
A 2-run Cat ng and Local Ace
I
I
I LOm , y r 9.0111
B 1Om commuting
f req t & conoun nt tit r

r
path
Figure 6-25: Separated One-Way Path Operation
6.6.3. Exclusive Bicycle Paths there is a significant cycling demand and very few
pedestrians desire to use the path or a separate footpath
Description and Purpose is provided;
An exclusive bicycle path (see Figure 6-26) is a path set there is very limited motor vehicle access across the
aside for exclusive use by cyclists. For this facility to be path;
established, legally appropriate signing is required (sect.
9.2.2). it is possible to achieve an alignment that generally
allows cyclists uninterrupted and safe travel at a rela-
An exclusive bicycle path permits fast bicycle travel and is tively high constant speed (say 30 km/h); and
the most desirable of the off-carriageway alternatives, par-
ticularly for commuter routes although it will also serve there is significant cycling demand and the path width
many local destinations along the way. The ultimate facil- is too narrow for shared use.
ity will have full grade separation at road intersections and
a path lighting system to improve safety for users,
amongst other features.
Routes are ideally developed along suburban railway and
freeway reserves. These corridors can link separate areas
that have a high population density or provide links to
regional centres and other areas with high employment
densities. Such links will allow commuter bicycle use to
develop to its full potential.
Importantly, they may also provide for shorter trips to des-
tinations such as schools along the way, and enhance
access to rail stations and bus interchanges for those wish-
ing to combine cycling and public transport for longer
journeys.
The use of exclusive bicycle paths is rare because few sit-

uations exist where a path that is popular with cyclists is
not equally popular with pedestrians. It will therefore be
an expensive alternative as, in many instances, a parallel
exclusive pedestrian path will also be required to avoid the
tendency of pedestrians to use the path.
Figure 6-26: Exclusive Bicycle Path
Exclusive bicycle paths are most appropriate where: (Sydney Harbour Bridge Cycleway, NSW)
PATHS 91
V (op
:J/) :
:
Figure 6-27: Exclusive Bicycle Path - Layout
Application Details Designers should review the likely operational character-

istics of paths during the design process to determine the
Figure 6-27 illustrates the desirable layout of an exclusive appropriate path width.
use path. The desirable widths are provided in Table 6-6.
As for other types of paths for cycling, a separation line is With reference to Figure 6-28:
desirable, as are close spaced pavement symbols, to rein-
force the appropriate use of the path. 3.0 metres is the desirable width for a path where
`high' speeds (i.e. 30 km/h +) are possible;
Path Width (m) 2.5 metres is the acceptable minimum path width for a
Main Path paths with a predominant purpose of commuting,
during periods of peak use; and
b 2.5 3.0
2.0 metres is the absolute minimum path width where
I Acceptable Range 2.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 paths experience very low use at all times and on all
1 1
days, or where significant constraints exist limiting the

Table 6-6: Exclusive Bicycle Path Dimensions
construction of a wider path, and may be acceptable
The various path operational scenarios are shown in for a commuting path where the path user flows are
Figure 6-28. These form the basis of the widths provided tidal in nature.
in Table 6-6, and were developed with consideration of the
principles outlined in Section 6.3.4. Whilst unlikely, it is technically possible that situations
exist where wider paths may be justified i.e. where there
With reference to Section 6.3.3, the dimensions are suit- are high speeds, and where high `concurrent' bicycle vol-
able for a path capacity up to 300 cyclists per hour, based umes exist for both directions, such that passing within the
on 2 lanes of bicycle traffic. lane in each direction is necessary.
92 BICYCLES
fP U
T ' l 6mumstanta of
I I
A 2.Om C r Wti g and Local AOCM

I
I t t I
I
I
I E t
t t t
6 2.5m i and Local Acc
Ft" r I
20 km/h I I I
I I
s
1
C 3.0m Cwntnuting i
t
Frequent & c urtent I I
I t
in both directions
I t t
3O km/h+
Figure 6-28: Exclusive Use Path Operation
6.7. Intersections of Paths with Roads. Sharp downgrades to road junctions should be avoided
where possible. Where the path alignment is straight on
Off-road paths must be readily accessible in order to be the approach to a road (e.g. Figure 6-36) then the path
well utilised by the community. Access should always be should be as flat as possible, the longitudinal down gradi-
provided where paths cross local streets and arterial ent being no greater than 3 per cent. Where the approach
roads. Accessibility should be improved further by con- speed to the intersection is controlled (e.g. Figure 6-29) a
nections to quiet local roads or culs-de-sac. Connections steeper downgrade may be used in difficult situations.
to local roads may be similar to the treatments used for Under these conditions it is suggested that the desirable
local street closures discussed in Section 4.7(d) and illus- maximum grade is 5 per cent.
trated in Figure 4-37. Where a path is located on one side
of a road, kerb ramps should be provided opposite every Paths for cycling should be aligned to intersect roads at
side street to enable local users access. They should approximately 90 degrees. Where sight distance is restrict-
preferably provide an attractive setting that enhances the ed curves should be used on the approach to slow cyclists
streetscape. All connections and crossings should be to a safe approach speed (refer Figure 6-29). Such an
designed and constructed so as to encourage safe and cor- alignment may not suit some cyclists and landscaping may
rect use by cyclists. be necessary to prevent cyclists from taking short cuts.
6.7.1. Path Approach Design Criteria 6.7.2. Crossings of Roads
Intersections of paths with roads should meet the criteria There are a number of types of path/road intersections that
set out below. are applicable depending on circumstances.
Sight distance to the intersection must be adequate on all 6.7.2.1. Crossings of Low Volume Streets
approaches so that both cyclist and motorist can easily
identify the treatment and the priority that applies. In gen- The occurrence of low volume local streets frequently
eral, given that intersection controls generally do not intersecting with significant paths can result in a poor level
favour cyclists under traffic regulations, road carriageway of service for cyclists, or a inferior riding experience for
traffic must currently be given priority at these locations. recreational cyclists.
PATHS 93
Contrasting foo path

to pass throug
/
/
H
C
I
/
/
80m
ti
1
x t Y i
Minimum 1 10m 3m
Desirable 20m 10m
Figure 6-29: Preferred Treatment of Road/Path Intersection
Local authorities invest considerable resources into Local The preferred treatment is a path crossing that is raised
Area Traffic Management schemes. Therefore an opportu- with appropriate give way sign controls erected to regulate
nity exists to improve the continuity of paths for cyclists road traffic. An example is shown Figure 6-30.
whilst simultaneously providing a `device' to control There are known legislative constraints to the use of the
speeds in local streets. treatment under several jurisdictions and therefore some
94 BICYCLES
not more than two lanes of traffic exist (total, both

directions combined); and
a warrant for higher form of road crossing is not satis-

fied, such as a Pedestrian Actuated Signal crossing,
which should then be used as an alternative (refer AS
1742.10 or relevant State regulations).
6.7.2.2. General Crossing Treatment
Where the path is intended for general use, traffic volumes

are relatively low (up to 3000 vehicles per day) and it is
desired that motor vehicles have priority the treatment
shown in Figure 6-29 should be adopted. This treatment
Figure 6-30: Low Volume Street Crossing provides for a straight crossing of the road using kerb
(St Georges Road, Melb., Vic) ramps (sect. 6.7.3.3).
care needs to be taken before implementation, to ensure If the intersection is designed in accordance with the prin-
any proposed treatment would conform with relevant ciples described in Section 6.7.1 then the intersection and
requirements. priority will be easily identified and Give Way or Stop
signs for cyclists should not be necessary. However, care
This treatment is generally appropriate where:

is required in respect of give way requirements where a
it conforms to the details in Figure 6-31; path for cycling intersects with a footpath located adjacent
and parallel to a road (sect. 6.8).
speed environment is below the general urban speed
limit, or where a Local Area Traffic Management If the path is predominantly intended for use by primary
scheme is proposed that would achieve suitable cross- school children it is essential to control their movement
ing conditions; across the road. It is recommended the treatment illustrat-
ed in Figure 6-36 should be adopted. In this special case a
it is located in urban areas; sign should be erected requiring cyclists to dismount.
good visibility at the crossing point exists for both road
and path users; 6.7.2.3. Additional Measures for Collector Roads and
it is located away from intersections of roads;
Arterial Roads
the priority that would be assigned to the road is con- Where an off-road path crosses a busy local street or an
sistent with that elsewhere along the road, in the vicin- arterial road away from an intersection it may be neces-
ity of the crossing; sary to provide facilities to aid the cyclists in making a
safe crossing. These facilities may be in the form of con-
the proportion of commercial traffic is low; trolled crossings or physical refuges.
to
Figure 6-31: Low Volume Crossing Details

PATHS 95
(a) Controlled Crossings allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross the road in two
stages;
Paths for cycling can be coordinated with signalised or
unsignalised pedestrian crossings and school crossings. provide physical protection for cyclists and pedestri-
Cyclists are usually required by law to dismount at formal ans;
pedestrian crossings including school crossings. Where a
bicycle route crosses a road at a signalised crossing care increase motorists' awareness of the crossing; and
should be taken to ensure that activation buttons are locat- can be installed at relatively low cost.
ed to avoid the need for cyclists to cross in front of oncom-
ing path users and within easy reach for a mounted cyclist. Note, the example in Figure 6-33 has a `perpendicular'
Induction loops can also be installed to facilitate detection. crossing refuge for cyclists travelling in one direction, and
a `parallel' crossing refuge for cyclists travelling in the
`Bicycle' symbols for traffic lights are included in other direction. This is to facilitate access around an large
Australian Standard 1742.2 and should be provided where island to the left of the photo.
the crossing serves both pedestrians and cyclists provided
State traffic regulations permit this treatment. A green Refuges are appropriate where;
bicycle signal allows cyclists to ride across the crossing.
Where pedestrian and cyclist demand are both heavy there motor traffic volumes and speeds make it difficult for
is a tendency for pedestrians to move to the front and cyclists and pedestrians to cross two way motor traffic
block the progress of cyclists using the crossing. In such flow;
cases consideration should be given to segregating cyclists the combined pedestrian and cyclist demand justifies
and pedestrians. special treatment; and

The appropriate type of crossing should be determined sufficient road width exists or can be readily achieved
with reference to normal warrants for pedestrian crossings to enable the installation of the refuge treatment (such
using the combined cyclist and pedestrian demand. that the resultant road width does not create squeeze
(b) Refuges points for on-road cyclists).
These traffic islands, examples of which are shown in In order to accommodate a bicycle which is typically 1.75
Figure 6-33 and Figure 6-34, may be beneficial because metres long, it is desirable that a refuge be at least 2.0
they: metres wide. However, 1.8 metres may suffice in tight sit-
uations. Where there are concentrated cyclist demands at
certain periods of the day (e.g. secondary schools) a
greater width and length may be required to provide addi-
tional storage.
Refuges should be furnished with a holding rail to allow a

stationary cyclist to remain mounted within the refuge
area. Rails should be located clear of the gap although
where the gap is wide (i.e. Z in Figure 6-34 greater than
2m) the rails can be located within the gap, on the left
hand side. They should also be provided with adequate
street lighting to enhance visibility of the island and
cyclists using it at night.
Figure 6-32: Bicycle Signals Figure 6-33: Refuge (Black Forest, SA)
96 BICYCLES
y
It
1.$-Mm *We. 2.K' t}y3-4.Om
lk-1.5m ' I .Qm
Z*51
Figure 6-34: Cyclists' Refuge - Details
6.7.2.4. Other - Paths Adjacent To Roads by cyclists. The preferred arrangement for an intersection
of a shared footway with a side road is shown in Figure
Paths which run parallel to busy roads often have to cross 6-35. Ramps for the cyclists should have the features
side roads which may be minor or important traffic routes. shown in Figure 6-44.
At signalised intersections it is appropriate to have the
cyclists cross with the pedestrian phase. It is important to
locate the crossing so that sufficient sight distance exists to
6.7.3. Ancillary Treatments & Features
allow the driver of a left turning vehicle to see a cyclist 6.7.3.1. Path Terminal Devices
waiting to cross.
(a) General
It is generally appropriate for cyclists to cross close to the
intersection, particularly if there are high boundary fences, Path terminal devices are generally erected to restrict drivers
other restrictions to sight lines or queues of vehicles pre- of cars from illegally gaining access to reserves and also on
sent. Where sight lines are not restricted, the crossing may the premise that they aid the safety of cyclists by restricting
be located further from the intersection where the side cyclists' speeds on the path approaches to roads. However,
road may be narrower. However, the deviation required there is some evidence these devices are a hazard to cyclists
should not be excessive as this will discourage proper use and as such they generally should not be installed unless:
PATHS 97
Holding Rail
S ed Path
If <30m refer to Protected

Two-Way Lone Intersection Continuing Road
Moil (Figure -7) -------'
Figure 6-35: Intersection of Shared Path at Side Street - Preferred Treatment
there is clear evidence of unauthorised and undesirable the approach alignment of path, and in particular the
motor vehicle access; and anticipated categories of cyclists;
the device is effective at excluding such vehicles and be accessible to a range of path users including pedes-
not readily circumvented trians and physically disabled people. In relation to
bicycles, they should accommodate the common bicy-
Cyclists must be able to negotiate path entrances with cle types as well as tandem bicycles, bicycles with
ease. They need to be able to concentrate on other traffic, trailers, and other human powered vehicles;
pedestrians, pavements and ramps and not be distracted by
overly restrictive barriers. if consisting of a `frame' be:
It is also well known that cyclists do not like to dismount - at least 1.0 metre high above the riding surface;
and walk. Once on the bicycle they prefer to keep moving,
- shaped so that on the approach side of the frame,
even slowly, and hence maintain some momentum rather
the minimum radius of the frame is 250 mm; and
than having to stop completely.
- constructed of individual frame elements that are
For these reasons overly restrictive path terminal devices
rounded, without sharp edges, and having a mini-
are usually ineffective because cyclists may travel around
mum diameter of 100 mm
them, sometimes performing dangerous manoeuvres.
Complicated chicanes should therefore not be provided. In if consisting of isolated vertical poles (e.g. bollards):
general crossings should allow cyclists to move straight
across the intersecting roadway, any slowing of cyclists - be at least 1.0 metre high above the riding surface;
preferably being achieved by relatively sharp curves on and
the path in advance of the intersection. - have a minimum diameter of 300 mm*
(b) Terminal Design be painted in a contrasting colour (white or yellow)
If local authorities choose to use or develop terminal and be fitted with quality reflective tape (see Figure
devices that are not documented in this guide, or otherwise 6-42) on horizontal and vertical elements to ensure it is
to implement devices discussed elsewhere in this guide, visible from all directions. Barriers etc. on both sides
the designs should: of paths should be painted and delineated in this
manner. Similarly, reflective tape should be fully
seek to enhance the safety of cyclists accounting for wrapped around the elements to which it is attached to
factors such as gradients, the proximity of roads and ensure that it is clearly visible from all directions;
98 BICYCLES
be illuminated in accordance with the AS 1158 Public - that may present additional risk (e.g. single lane
Lighting Code, or with the lighting requirements of devices or those with narrow central bollards); or
this document, as appropriate;
due to conditions associated with increased risk
be located with at least 1.4 metres clearance to adjacent (e.g. where gradients are significant, stopping sight
fixtures and so that cyclists can pass conveniently; distance to the device is limited, where group rides
occur regularly or where paths are heavily traf-
not present a hazardous feature for any pedestrian ficked); and
group (e.g. visually disabled pedestrians - also see
sect. 6.2); be preceded by tactile linemarking, or tactile path sur-
face and a painted unbroken line, where cyclists need
not be easily circumvented by unauthorised vehicles,
to deviate from their line of approach. Similarly as a
such that either the device is rendered ineffective, or
further means of warning to approaching cyclists, it is
that alternative paths of access are created in adjacent
desirable for the device to be visible to one cyclist
reserve areas resulting in higher maintenance
whilst following immediately behind another cyclist.
demands;
*There are numerous reports of collisions of cyclists on
have clearances at the terminal device and parallel
group rides with isolated vertical poles (e.g. bollards)
roads that are sufficient in the event of cyclists failing
located within paths. Therefore it may be appropriate to
to properly negotiate the device;
consider the use of poles that are not less than 1.8 metres
be located 5 - 10 metres in advance of the intersection high where narrow poles (minimum 100 mm diameter) are
to enable `storage' and deceleration, whilst waiting for used, to increase the likelihood of observation of poles
other path users to pass through the terminal device; above the form of a leading cyclist.
have regard for the general location of the device in the (c) Terminal Device Opening Width
immediate path length. In general it would be inap-
In most instances a minimum opening width of 1.4 metres
propriate to locate terminals at or near curves, within a
is appropriate to encourage slower speeds by cyclists or
distance of less than 5 metres of kerb ramps or within
where restriction to motor-vehicle access is warranted.
a manoeuvring zone of cyclists;
Terminal devices should have sufficient capacity to
accommodate emergency or maintenance vehicle accommodate the anticipated path traffic (sect. 6.3.3).
access where this is not available elsewhere in the
Due to concerns regarding injuries to cyclists resulting
vicinity of the terminal (in the event that the path will
from the use of overly restrictive terminal devices, there is
be relied upon by such vehicles). Note, wherever ter-
some support for wider openings (up to 1.6 metres), on the
minal device elements are removable the connections
basis that the terminals devices will still discourage the
(or sockets) should be flush at the connecting surface
majority of drivers of cars illegally attempting to gain
and not present a hazard to path users;
access to reserves and the like.
include adequate protection where the sides grade
(d) Terminal Treatments Examples
away from the path at a steep angle or where obstruc-
tions exist; Because the cognitive skills of primary school children are
not fully developed, facilities provided specifically for this
be constructed so that small passenger cars cannot pass
easily through or under horizontal rail sections where
group or used frequently by this group may require more
a primary objective of the terminal is to restrict access
restrictive controls. The devices used should be kept as
for motor-vehicles. Note, it is generally impractical to
simple as possible and as well as slowing the cyclist to
restrict motorcycles and to do so may result in hazard
walking pace, should direct the cyclist so that the nearest
conflicting traffic stream is more easily seen.
for cyclists;
have regard for other (conflicting) paths, other paths of

A suitable arrangement utilising a fence is shown in
access and for sight lines. Terminals should be locat-
Figure 6-36. It is also necessary to utilise such an arrange-
ed in such a way that existing paths are not obstructed
ment to restrict speed where space does not permit sharp
in some way. Similarly sight lines should not be reverse curves on the approach. Fences that have horizon-
restricted due to the terminal device or to users (as a tal rails should not be used as these present an unaccept-
result of the terminal device); able hazard to motorists. This applies to treated pine log
fencing as well as chain mesh fencing (refer also to
not be located at mid-block locations where speeds are Section 7.6.2).
likely to exceed 20 km/h;
In other circumstances the preferred path terminal treat-
where necessary, include signs or pavement markings, ment is to either separate the path entranceway and exit
generally on the path approach to the device, warning (see Figure 6-37), or reduce the path width on the
of the presence of devices: approach to intersections or structures (see Figure 6-38).
PATHS 99
>-
Cl arance between fence and .»..,,

road is desirable to provide
cyclists with er view of traft
asrn
4-
*Length of fence - 5W
W footway width
0 Minimum
Desirable
L?
lOm 1 3m
20m t Orn
I Ì
Figure 6-36: Alternative Terminal Controls at RoadlPath Intersection for School Children
A deflection rail terminal may be used to achieve the exceeded, it could be duplicated so that two single lane
objective of a path narrowing. As a single lane terminal it openings are provided.
is appropriate for use where low bicycle volumes exist.
Whilst an alternative device may be preferred, in the event In addition to the required design features listed in Section
that the capacity of the single lane access is likely to be (b) above, a deflection rail should have the following char
acteristics:
gt
[V
I
!
-
I
/i
II
lit
a
I
Figure 6-37: Example of Path Terminal - Separated Access Details
1.Om
10
I-Io I
Figure 6-38: Example of Path Terminal - Deflection Rail Terminal Details

PATHS 101
taper on each side of the approaches generally con-

structed from linemarking; and
the general path width (e.g. on approach to the facili-

ty) should be maintained through the deflection rail. -1
(e) Existing Practices and Central Path Fixtures
Bollards, gates, barriers, kerbs, etc. are often installed at

entrances to paths for cycling and at the ends of structures
to prevent illegal access by motor vehicles. These devices
present safety and convenience problems to cyclists and
should only be used where no other alternative facilities
are available.
Many instances exist where bollards or holding rails (sect.

6.7.3.2) are located in the centre of paths and no feature
exists at the sides of the paths that would prevent access by
motor vehicles and as such the devices serve no particular
purpose. Whilst varied opinions exist, there is considerable
Figure 6-40: Path Terminal Example with Tactile Surface
concern (and growing evidence in the form of injury com- Treatment (Jack Pesch Bridge, Indooroopilly, Qld)
pensation claims by cyclists) that the construction of these
devices in the centre of paths is hazardous to cyclists.

in Figure 6-39. Holding rails should not be constructed
Where authorities are determined to maintain or construct centrally on paths due to the narrow section tubing used
central fixtures the need for these must be justified in for rails and hence less than obvious nature of the rails.
every instance. If they must be provided, central path fix-
In particular, the locating of bollards and other fixtures
tures should conform to Section (b) above. In addition centrally on paths is considered to be inappropriate at or
they should at least incorporate the design features shown
near curves, or at intersections in the manoeuvring area
of cyclists.
6.7.3.2. Holding Rails
Holding rails (refer Figure 6-42) should only be provided

where there is a reasonable likelihood that cyclists will
have to stop at intersections with roadways or paths. For
example, they should not be provided at the intersections
of paths with local streets where it is unlikely cyclists will
have to stop and wait.
tk*r /T*Cft e
The rails must be placed within easy reach of cyclists, gen-
erally on the left hand side of the path, to ensure they:
are conveniently located, enabling cyclists to stop

without having to dismount or remove shoes from toe
clips;
encourage cyclists to stop when appropriate;

rds
assist the cyclists as they move off, reducing the time
spent travelling through an intersection and aiding bal-
ance, thus improving safety; and
Z_
in addition to other clues, provide a useful warning of
'.5-tom
the existence of an intersection.
To enable a holding rail to be most effective it is important

that it is placed so that the cyclists using it can easily see
approaching traffic and safely cross or enter the intersect-
ing carriageway. If possible, holding rails should be locat-
ed about 600 mm from the kerbline or edge of the inter-
Figure 6-39: Central Path Fixture Protection Measures secting roadway, and 300 mm from paths (refer Figure
102 BICYCLES
6-44). Where appropriate, holding rails should conform to 6.7.3.3. Kerb Ramps
the requirements listed in Section 6.7.3.1(b).
The design of all kerb ramps should be in accordance with
A sign extension (refer Figure 6-42) should not be used in AS 1428 and otherwise with the details shown in Figure
close proximity to road carriageways or where cyclists 6-44. The provisions of a gently graded and smooth invert
would turn in close proximity to the sign extension. at the gutter ramp are vital design features for the safety
and comfort of all path users, including cyclists.
To avoid the unnecessary proliferation of holding rails,
they should not be installed at the traffic islands or Flatter kerb ramps of 1 (vert.) in 15 (horiz.) should be used
approaches to signalised intersections unless specifically for transition between on-road facilities and paths to cater
sought by users. for the higher travel speeds (also see sect. 4.5.3).
In various sections, this guide details both the more tradi-

tional flared entry kerbs ramps (e.g. Figure 6-44) as well
as the 3-plane style kerb ramps promoted in AS 1428 (e.g.
Figure 6-37).
In locations where cyclists turn to and from roads, the

turning paths of cyclists should always be accommodated.
To achieve this flared entry kerb ramps or alternatively,
wide 3-plane style kerb ramps can be used.
Three plane style kerb ramps should be provided where a

path for cyclists exists in the verge area of a road, and
which is parallel and in close proximity to the road (e.g.
Figure 6-36). This style of ramp is generally appropriate
where pedestrians are present, and to avoid the existence
Figure 6-41: Holding Rail (O'Halloran Hill, SA) of a vertical step in the verge area.
Optional sign exte

( rally on roar side at roil)
T
T
4 251)rm Ra"
tom Re leck"we tope, see detail
diorter l
'1
0.6m (.)
*Tope to be t s ify otherwise
Figure 6-42: Holding Rail Details

PATHS 103
Maintenance practices need to ensure the resultant chan-

nel is kept clear of debris.
6.8. Intersections of Paths with Paths

Intersections between paths are relatively simple arrange-
ments as shown in Figure 6-45. However they do require
careful consideration taking into account similar factors to
those used in road intersection design such as sight dis-
tance and gradients.
At these intersections it is useful to provide:
Figure 6-43: Smooth Kerb Ramp (Adelaide, SA) pavement markings including centre lines and Give
Way holding lines;
A combination of the two ramp styles should be consid-
ered, e.g. a flared entry ramp with side ramps not exceed- pavement splays in the corners (minimum radius of
ing the maximum ramp gradient. 2.5m); and
For further details on pedestrian facilities and require- Cross intersections which allow high speed conflicts
ments AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians, should be con- should not be provided.
sulted.
To ensure right of way requirements are emphasised by
Where there are short (less than 5m wide) sections of path site conditions, consideration should be given to the con-
across traffic islands it may be preferable to provide a struction and additional controls (see Figure 6-46 and
channel at road level rather than back-to-back kerb ramps Figure 6-47) at the intersections of exclusive paths or seg-
with only a few metres of raised path in between. regated paths with footpaths, where:
12M (mi 1 In to be de t
with Au*oods
o cool 1428
f1 Path (rocs.} --
r1
h
Control to
NOW footpath
Footpath
fading Rail tine Rood

Reserie 19r)
Face of kerb
Edge of gutter
NOTE: Location of Holding Rail be dependent on sit, t distance cements
Figure 6-44: Kerb Ramp & Holding Rail Layout Details

104 BICYCLES
paths are well used; cant capital and operating costs its provision needs to be
carefully considered. Whilst many bicycles may be
the footpath is used regularly by visually impaired equipped with modern lighting equipment this equipment is
people; or generally inadequate to illuminate the pavement so that
sight distance constraints exist. cyclists, travelling at a `reasonable' speed, are able to avoid
potholes and other hazards. The provision of lighting does
In general the intersections of paths should be constructed not remove the need for providing a separation (centre) line.
and controlled in accordance with the established princi-
ples of codes of practice for roads. For, instance, at path The provision of public lighting on paths for cycling
junctions, the controls and layout should favour the pre- depends on the nature of the facility and its expected use
dominant flow on the straight through route. Also, designat night. In general lighting of bicycle facilities may be
ers must ensure the construction and controls are consis- categorised as follows:
tent with local regulations.
paths for cycling associated with promenades or some
The area around path intersections should be kept clear of other centre of night-time activity. These are typically
hazardous obstacles, such as log barriers, to provide by the seaside, a river bank or in a city centre where a
cyclists with a recovery zone. Any landscaping or planting high standard of public lighting is desirable to create
should be low and `soft'. However, landscaping is useful an attractive environment;
where cyclists may attempt to travel the shortest path
paths for cycling used predominantly for commuting
between path junctions or at sharp curves, which
by workers or students. Because it becomes dark rela-
inevitably results in maintenance problems.

tively early in many Australian cities commuter
Care should also be exercised in the location of intersec- cyclists have no alternative but to ride during dusk,
tions on paths adjacent to watercourses so that water holes dawn or hours of darkness. Lighting of these paths
and steep embankments do not present a hazard to may be justified if there is significant usage at night.
cyclists. The treatment at the side of paths should provide Conversely the lack of lighting may adversely effect
a forgiving environment in terms of cyclist safety. use of the path at night; or
Recreational paths. Many recreational paths are used

6.9. Public Lighting of Paths primarily during day-light hours and the cost of public
lighting is generally not justified. Designers should,
6.9.1. Demand for Lighting and Standards
however, consider whether a proposed path is likely to
Effective lighting is an important influence on travel on attract enough night-time use to warrant lighting, at
paths for cycling after sunset. As lighting involves signifi- least at locations of increased hazard.
NOTE:
1. Cross rttersections of
s Id not be pro XCOM of
2.5m potential for high s clans
2. seder pr ' ion of
at side of paths where main
volumes high
Minimum
sW"er torn
2.5m Radius
Figure 6-45: Intersections of Paths with Paths

PATHS 105
r*0 Al
MMMWMM
XIN4
Kerb Rmv J
Figure 6-46: Intersections of Exclusive Use Path & Footpath

09
/7 .//.
Figure 6-47: Intersection of Separated Path & Footpath
Australian road authorities have very little collective expe- Australian Standard AS 1158.0-1997, provides standards
rience with public lighting of off-road paths. American for the lighting of urban roads and other public thorough-
and Canadian references (Illuminating Engineering fares. The standard specifies lighting category `B2' for
Society of North America, 1983: Velo Quebec, 1992) pro- bicycle paths. In view of the above mentioned overseas
vide information on practices in North America. Practices practice and public lighting experience this level may be
in the United Kingdom and Europe, where bicycle usage inappropriately low in most situations.
may be higher than in Australia or North America, tend to
provide higher levels of lighting as indicated in British Roads which have roadway lighting to the AS 1158 stan-
Standard BS 5489 (1989). dard will provide sufficiently for on-road bicycle facilities
and will have enough surround illuminance to provide
adequate lighting of shared footpaths or bicycle paths
located within 3 metres to 5 metres of the kerb.
106 BICYCLES
6.9.2. Objectives of Lighting on Paths For Where continuous lighting along a path is difficult to jus-
Cycling tify, it may be appropriate to light only the locations of
increased hazard such as;
The level of horizontal illumination needs to be sufficient
for cyclists to easily follow the path, avoid potholes and intersections with other paths or roads;
obstacles, and to read surface markings. An adequate level
of vertical illumination should also make vertical surfaces sharp horizontal and vertical curves, and steep grades;
such as fences, walls, kerbs, trees and shrubs visible. The ramps to structures and at the portals of tunnels and
overall level of lighting should enable cyclists to see other subways;
cyclists, read signs and also enable motorists to see cyclists
where the path intersects a road or runs close to a road. where clearance to obstructions is minimal;
In the absence of significant experience in Australia on where pedestrian numbers are high;
lighting levels for paths for cycling, the following Table
6-7 provides suggested lighting levels which should locations which have special security problems;
achieve the above object. The lighting levels given accord special facilities such as stairs, bicycle parking etc..
with the American and Canadian guides. The levels sug-
gested in the North American guides for tunnels, however, Where it is proposed to continuously light a highly utilised
are considered to be excessive and the lighting levels path to the levels given in Table 6-7, special attention
shown in Table 6-7 are therefore based on experience with should be given to the above listed locations of increased
pedestrian underpasses in the State of Victoria. hazard to ensure that they are lit to above the average
levels given in Table 6-7.

The levels listed in the table are for new installations. In
what is a consistent approach with Australian Standards Higher illumination levels are generally desirable in tunnels
the acceptable lamp output should be maintained to ensure to enhance the cyclists personal security. It is also desirable
that, in service, the levels do not fall below 70% of those to eliminate the temporary loss of sight experienced when
values in the table. riding from a bright environment into a relatively dark envi-
ronment. For this reason it is usual to adopt a higher level of
lighting in long tunnels during daylight hours and reducing
Minimum
Average the level at night when the contrast is less.
A e
Ver+cal Levels
Horizontal Vandalism can be a problem, particularly along paths in
(Lux)
els (Lax) isolated areas and this needs to be taken into account in
considering the provision of lighting and in the choice of
5
luminaires. If lighting can not be provided on a path, pro-
Tunnel vision of a separation line and retro-reflective signs and
¢10mlong 10 10 markers will result in improved guidance to cyclists.
> 10mlong 20 20
Table 6-7: Minimum Cycling Path Illumination Levels

107
7 Provision at Structures
7.1. General
The design of structures is very important to cyclists.
Existing road bridges are often narrower than the road on
the approaches thus creating a squeeze point for cyclists.
Because of the high relative cost of new bridges there is an
understandable tendency for designers to be as economi-
cal as possible in the widths provided for the various users.
It is important, however, that road managers look for ways
to better cater for cyclists at all existing structures and that
designers and planners ensure that cyclists are adequately
provided for in the design of all new structures.
The structures may cross-rivers, railway lines or busy

roads. They may be overpasses or underpasses that cater
for motor traffic, small bridges or underpasses specifical-
ly for cyclists and pedestrians, large drainage culverts
which also accommodate cyclists or a bicycle structure
attached to a road bridge.
Figure 7-2: Bridge without facilities for Cyclists
7.2.1. Exclusive Bicycle Lanes

If an exclusive lane exists on the approach to the bridge it
is desirable that the same width be carried across the
bridge. However, if this is not possible the desirable bicy-
cle lane width of 1.5 metres or absolute minimum bicycle
lane width of 1.2 metres should be provided (sect. 4.4.1).
Additional width is required if the kerb on the bridge is
fairly high, greater than 150 mm for example. Assuming
Figure 7-1: Cyclist Approaching Squeeze Point
3.4 metre lanes are required for motor traffic this necessi-
tates a bridge width of 9.8 metres or 9.2 metres respec-
7.2. Road Bridges tively for a two lane two way bridge.
Where the bicycle facilities described in Section 4 are pro- On roads where motor vehicle speeds are above 75 km/h,
vided on the approach to a road bridge it is important that the volume of commercial vehicles is greater than 400
a similar facility be continued across (or under) the struc- vehicles per day, or the gradient on the bridge is greater
ture. This should always be possible in the case of new than 5% it is desirable that the bicycle lane be at least 2.0
structures. In the case of existing structures it will not metres wide.
always be possible but consideration should be given to
implementing measures which will improve the situation In many cases, particularly in rural and outer urban areas, a
for cyclists (e.g. reduce width of motor traffic lanes). The sealed shoulder on the bridge and approaches will provide
treatments that assist cyclists to cross structures safely are the same level of service to cyclists as an exclusive bicycle
discussed below. lane without the costs of signs associated with the latter.
108 BICYCLES
7.2.2. Wide Kerbside Lanes In practice there may be no reasonable alternative to a

route with a traffic flow in excess of 3000 vehicles per day
If 7.4 metres to 9.0 metres exists between kerbs on a two and narrow road lane widths. In this event, bicycle access
lane two way bridge then the road should be marked only should be maintained, but the route should not be signed
with a centreline to provide wide kerbside lanes in each as part of the local bicycle route network. If the bicycle
direction (sect. 4.4.7). demand is significant (e.g. in excess of 200 bicycles per
day) then the provision of specific bridge facilities for
7.2.3. Use of Footpaths on Narrow Bridges cyclists should be considered.
The footpaths on bridges should be available for use by
young and inexperienced cyclists. If the width between 7.2.5. Two-way Shared Path on One Side
kerbs on a two lane two way bridge is less than 7.4 metres of Structure.
and footpaths exist on both sides of the bridge then ramps Where footpaths are only provided on one side of the
should be provided on both sides of the bridge so that bridge, and the traffic operating conditions and bridge
experienced commuter cyclists can also use the footway to widths would preclude the use of on-road bicycle facili-
avoid the squeeze point. Where a footway exists on only ties, a two-way shared use path on one side of the bridge
one side of the bridge it may be possible to utilise it for
one direction and provide a wide kerbside lane in the
opposite direction.
The absolute minimum footway width for one way opera-

tion by pedestrians and cyclists is 1.5 metres although a

greater width (say 1.8 or 2.0 metres) is desirable. Where a
high number of users exist (see sect. 6.3.3 and sect 6.6), I
and in the case of new construction, consideration should
be given to the establishment of a separated one-way path
(sect. 6.6.2.2).
7.2.4. Full integration of cyclists

Where the above measures are not possible it will normal-
ly be necessary for commuter cyclists to share narrow traf-
fic lanes with motor vehicles. Alternative routes must be
sought for young and inexperienced cyclists. Integration of
all cyclists with motor traffic is in general only appropriate
on roads having an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
of less than 3000 vehicles per day, and where a low speed
traffic environment exists, particularly where the propor-
Figure 7-3: Path Under Abutment
tion of young and inexperienced cyclists is significant. (Yarra River at Fitzsimmons Lane, Vic)
2.4m ruin
fi__
Cross Section Under Bridge
Figure 7-4: Treatment of a Two-Way Shared Pathway at the End of a Structure

PROVISION AT STRUCTURES 109
could be provided. This treatment would be appropriate 7.3. Road Tunnels

where there are several bridges on a short section of road
(e.g. a causeway) to avoid continual crossing of the road Access for cyclists should be permitted and specific pro-
by cyclists. It is also appropriate where a two way shared vision (e.g. lanes, paths) should be made for cyclists in
footway provided for young, inexperienced or recreation- road tunnels, where:
al cyclists is to be continued across the structure. Crossing
the journey time for cyclists in the tunnel does not
of the road by cyclists can also be avoided by providing a
exceed 5 minutes;
path beneath bridges near the abutments. Such an arrange-
ment is illustrated in Figure 7-4. the tunnel is adequately ventilated; and
the tunnel is the preferred route of access by local

cyclists.
The transition in light conditions is potentially hazardous

to cyclists, particularly during the daytime. Therefore it is
important that cyclists should be provided with the oppor-
tunity to ride outside of the area of the motor traffic lanes.
As an alternative solution to counter this problem, push
button actuators have been provided at the roadside for
cyclists at the entry to the tunnel, which initiates a flash-
ing banner `Cyclist in Tunnel', to warn entering motor
traffic of the presence of cyclists in the tunnel for a short

period. Variations on this solution could include the use of
a detector loop to actuate the banner, and the use of a con-
tinuous flashing banner.
7.4. Grade Separated Crossings

I
Grade separated crossings such as bicycle bridges, under-

passes and overpasses may be provided to achieve a safe
crossing of roads, rivers or railways. Although often pro-
Figure 7-5: Two-Way Shared Paths with Pedestrian Fence and vided as part of a shared path network they may be pro-
Wide Kerbside Lanes (Yarra River at Fitzsimmons Lane, Vic) vided as a safe alternative adjacent to narrow road bridges.
In difficult terrain a structure may be used to continue a
It is desirable that two way shared paths on one side of a shared path along the bank of a river.
bridge have a width as set out in Section 7.4.4. If a width
of less than 2.0 metres is available then it may be neces- Where paths are for shared use, the needs of users other
sary to erect warning signs advising cyclists not to over- than cyclists should be considered in the design of grade
take or pass on the footway. separated crossings. AUSTROADS Part 13 - Pedestrians,
provides guidance on a range of relevant issues associated
Where adequate widths and clearances can be maintained, with such structures including longitudinal gradients and
physical separation of bicycles and motor vehicles should handrails.
be incorporated if a two-way path for cycling is installed
on one side of the structure. On the approaches the path
should be at least 1.2 metres from the edge of the traffic
lane and concrete kerb and channel installed along the
length. Pedestrian fencing, preferably set back at least 450
mm from the line of kerb, should be installed on the foot-
way of the bridge to separate the cyclists from the motor
vehicles in the adjacent traffic lane. The same treatment
should be installed where for network reasons two way
shared paths, which are of adequate width and used by
child cyclists, are installed on both sides of structures
along very busy roads.
The gradients on road structures will normally be con-

trolled by physical constraints on design or the require-
ments of traffic in general. The gradients will, however,
normally be in the range of 4% to 5% which is acceptable
for commuter cyclists. Figure 7-6: Shared Use Path (Mount Henry Bridge, Perth, WA)
110 BICYCLES
7.4.1. Bicycle Bridges

Bicycle bridges may be constructed of steel, concrete or
timber. They should be designed to support pedestrian live
loading or light truck loading if the structure will be used
by maintenance machinery. On shorter span bridges lami-
nated timber beams or timber stringers with a steel or
timber deck have been used to provide an aesthetically
pleasing structure. Timber bridges can be erected with
limited resources and at a relatively low cost.
Figure 7-8: Connection from Shared Footway on a

River Bridge to a path on the River Bank Below
tions (e.g. through a road embankment) lends itself to the

provision of an underpass.
Many existing underpasses, including large drainage cul-

verts, could be readily converted for shared cyclist/pedestri-

an use. The critical considerations for the use of these struc-
tures are width, gradient, height and stopping sight lines.
In addition to the advice in Section 7.4.4, where an exist-

ing underpass structure is used, the acceptable minimum
Figure 7-7: Bridge along Bank of River
width is 2.5 metres.
7.4.2. Overpasses The desirable height of an underpass is 2.4 metres (sect.
6.3.5). However, drainage culverts with a vertical clearance
Overpass structures are normally more economical to con-
of only 2.0 metres have been successfully utilised to
struct than underpasses and have the following relative
accommodate paths for cycling under roads and this is con-
advantages:
sidered to be acceptable when utilising existing structures.
they cause less disruption during construction;
The relative advantages and disadvantages of using a cul-
the public perceive them as safer in terms of personal vert with limited clearance rather than an at-grade cross-
security because users are not hidden from the view of ing should be evaluated. If it is decided to use the culvert,
the general public; signs should be erected to warn cyclists of the reduced
headroom. Other steps should also be considered includ-
they are less prone to vandalism; ing some form of external (to the culvert) roof transition
(from a height of 2.5 metres to the height of the culvert
they have no drainage problems; and
roof) to negate the chance of a cyclist colliding with the
continuously operated public lighting may not be abrupt low roof face of a culvert.
required.
A drainage culvert should not cater for cyclist/pedestrian
Overpasses do, however, require a vertical clearance of at use unless it satisfies the recommendations in Section
least 5.5 metres above the roadway and, unless the road is 6.3.8 (for drainage), whilst providing adequate vertical
in a cutting, the approach ramps may require cyclists to clearance. Appropriate warning signs should be installed
travel for greater distances to use an overpass compared to advising of alternative crossing points for use during
an underpass. higher water flows.
In some States, it is required that overpasses are encaged to If an underpass is used the alignment of the path on the
discourage objects being dropped onto underpassing traffic. approach should be designed such that users can see
through the culvert. Underpasses of roads should be con-
7.4.3. Underpasses structed with minimal cover between the top of the under-
pass and the road. Whilst this may necessitate the reloca-
An advantage to cyclists of using an underpass is that the tion of services it has the advantage that shorter approach
gradients will often be more favourable, either being rela- ramps can be used requiring less overall space. Also better
tively flat or having a down grade followed by an up grade opportunities for the provision of adequate sight lines may
which assists the cyclist. The topography at some loca- be possible in order to enhance personal security.
Also: 7.5. Bridge Surfaces

Underpasses should be lit to a high standard to The surfaces of bridges should be designed and construct-
enhance personal security (sect. 6.9). ed to resist slippage or skidding of bicycle tyres under
inclement weather conditions.
Murals can often be provided to discourage graffiti and
public lighting should be robust enough to withstand In addition to common asphalt and concrete surfaces,
vandalism. timber is often used as a bridge surface material. From
cyclists' perspective, some precautions are required in the
case of timber surfaces. Further discussion is provided in
Section 8.5.3.
7.6. Supplementary Treatments

7.6.1. Bicycle Wheeling Ramps
Where it is not possible to locate a path for cycling so that
an acceptable gradient is achieved a bicycle wheeling
ramp (see Figure 7-11) may be provided to accommodate
a significant change in level over a short distance.
Wheeling ramps should be used as a last resort and should

not necessarily be regarded as a treatment that serves well

the needs of cyclists. They can be as unsatisfactory to
recreational cyclists (i.e. carrying children) as for com-
muters (due to inconvenience). They are generally regard-
Figure 7-9: Drainage Culvert Used as Bicycle Underpass ed as inappropriate where used in association with new
(Knox, Vic) path facilities if alternative path access is possible.
7.4.4. Desirable Widths Existing stairs can often be readily modified to provide for
cyclists by the addition of a ramp formed by concrete infill
On new grade separated crossings, the minimum clear or steel plate. Ramps may be either on the sides or within
width should be determined in accordance with the rec- a median of the stairs.
ommendations in Section 6.6 allowing for the nature of
use, the type of path and for clearances. In general such Also:
crossings should not be less than 3.0 metres in width. wheeling ramps should be provided on both sides of
However, a minimum width of 2.0 metres (between stairways where significant bicycle volumes exist;
handrails if appropriate) may be adopted in situations the gradient of ramps should not exceed 25% (CROW,
where an existing structure is being utilised and: 1994);
bicycle traffic demand is low and few pedestrians
would be expected;
the geometry of the approaches to the overpass would

reduce the speed of the cyclists; or
the use of the structure would be predominantly in one

direction at peak times such as `tidal flow' commuter
routes.
7.4.5. Approach Ramps

Other than as discussed in Section 6.3.6, the gradients on
approach ramps to overpasses and underpasses should be
limited to 10% (1 in 10) for a desirable maximum length of
20 metres or 7% (1 in 14) for a desirable length of 50 metres.
On existing structures that incorporate right angle landings

in the alignment of the approach ramps, or where adequate
sight distance cannot be provided, warning signs advising Figure 7-10: Drainage Culvert Used as Bicycle Underpass
cyclists and other users of the hazards should be erected. (Willoughby, NSW)
112 BICYCLES
narrow channels or channels that are rounded at the 7.6.2. Fences and Batters
base should be used to improve the ease of wheeling
for cyclists. A channel designed to accommodate what The installation of a fence barrier at the side of a path is
is on average the widest bicycle tyre (i.e. that of a desirable where it is located in close proximity to a steep
mountain bike) would be ideal; batter or large fall, or more specifically as recommended
by Figure 7-13. In addition to those referred to in the
the channel should be constructed approximately 0.4 figure, other circumstances exist where it may be desirable
metres from a fence or wall, or so as to avoid the catch- to erect fences even if provision is not required by the
ing of pedals or handle bars; figure. These include intersections of paths or a curving
path alignment, located in the vicinity of batters or a fall.
handrails should be constructed as close as practical to
the fence or wall, when erected adjacent to a wheeling A fence barrier may be appropriate where a path is locat-
ramp; ed adjacent to a watercourse or lake. A full barrier fence
would be appropriate where a vertical fall to water occurs
wheeling ramps should be constructed with a smooth
within 5 metres of a path.
transition onto and off of the ramp;
it may be desirable to construct the ramp with a kerb Figure 7-13 highlights the circumstances in which either a
(see Figure 7-12) to limit the possibility of pedestrians partial barrier fence (refer Figure 7-14), or a full barrier
fence (refer Figure 7-15) or equivalent form of protection,
inadvertently stepping on to the ramp section; and
should be used. These barriers are intended to prevent
it would be prudent to construct the ramp so as to min- access to a slope or to a fall away from a path or other
imise the possibility that it may be cycled on. riding surface, where injury might otherwise be expected
in the event of a cyclist riding inadvertently off the line of
a path.
Similar or even more stringent measures may be required

adjacent roads. Where a batter or fall is located in close
proximity to a road, designers should have regard for the
requirements of Figure 7-13, particularly where no kerb
exists at the edge of a road. However the actual measures
required should be decided upon with consideration of all
road users and of the particular circumstances that exist.
A fence barrier should be 1.4 metres (1.2 metres min.)

high, measured from the riding surface.
As a key design objective of fences constructed in close

proximity to bicycle lane or path facilities, cyclists (and
their bicycles) should be able to brush against fences at
Figure 7-11: Bicycle Wheeling Ramp (Yarra Path, Vic) speed and not be injured or `caught' as a result.
1
75-IODMM kerb
50-1 r
4ftm
Figure 7-12: Bicycle Wheeling Ramp Construction Details
iff Fame
t It fndm
r ADi mpow <2 <0"25
Pence r weed! <5 0.25 to 2
INN Barrier Fenr kW <a 1 >2 t
==t====
II
metres)] Z I
red <1 >8

I toy 1 >4
<5......_._ 3 to 4
_1 <5 i <3
'` off' surface where fafi withal t m of path

"B ' Fence required if torte within t m of path
Figure 7-13: Requirement for Fence Barriers
Where it is proposed to use fences or similar structures in Quebec (1992) indicates cyclists are more likely to be
association with bicycle lane or path facilities, the follow- injured by striking a fence than by riding into a ravine;
ing factors should also be considered:
the width of paths and lanes should account for the
the various fence elements (posts, railings etc.) should presence of fences (see sect. 6.3.5 for further details on
be designed to minimise the possibility of cyclists clearances);
snagging their handlebars or pedals on the barrier;
fence railing likely to have (or develop) burrs, splin-
care needs to be exercised in the choice of fences to ters, sharp or rough edges or surfaces should be avoid-
avoid those that would give rise to spearing injuries if ed. In general steel fences are preferred;
struck (by any vehicle). In particular, the proximity of
fences to roads will have a bearing on this aspect; the following fence types should not be used within I
metre of bicycle routes, and preferably would be locat-
the ends of fences should be at least 1 metre away from ed further away:
the riding surface, but may taper closer to the edge of
the path if necessary (refer Figure 7-18). They should Treated pine log - these are often constructed with
also be appropriately delineated by signs and reflective exposed ends and are invariably too low to be used
tape, and preferably be of a light colour. Note, Velo adjacent to bicycle routes;
114 BICYCLES
Chain mesh - these may catch pedals, have exposed horizontal fence rails can act as a ladder for children.
elements in some instances and have been responsible
for spearing injuries; and Examples of fences that have desirable functional qualities
in so far as cycling is concerned are shown in Figure 7-16
Post and wire - these have exposed elements. and Figure 7-17. Both have provision to avoid the catch-
ing of pedals of cyclists.
the width of gaps in a `full b 'er' fence should be
such that children cannot climb through the fence; and
.,,.-Smooth Roil ..Smt oth R
Path
i mP ICorance
tie 1
Figure 7-14: Partial Barrier Fence Details
L. Lsomm Pedal nonce
Path
Figure 7-15: Full Barrier Fence Details

Figure 7-16: Full Barrier Fence Figure 7-17: Inclined Full Barrier Fence
(Toowong Bikeway, Taringa, Qld) (Jack Pesch Bridge, Indooroopilly, Qld)
Figure 7-18: Fence Construction Details
Figure 7-19: Pedestrian/Cyclist Bridge with Rails for Disabled People

116 BICYCLES
8 Construction and Maintenance
8.1. General a more detailed examination of the road surface to be

made including problems that are easily missed from a
Smooth, debris free surfaces are a fundamental require- motor vehicle.
ment for riding bicycles in safety on paths, and on all
roads, from freeways to local streets. As cyclists ride at A substantial capital investment is often made in provid-
speeds up to 50 km/h on downhill grades, a rough surface ing bicycle lanes and responsible authorities should also
or pothole can cause a cyclist to fall or swerve into the have a commitment to adequately maintain these facilities.
path of motor traffic on roads. On uphill grades the speed
The measures discussed in the sections below will
differential between cyclists and motor traffic is greater
facilitate safer cycling and benefit other road and path
and hence cyclists are exposed to potential conflict with
users, as well.
motor traffic for a relatively long time as they manoeuvre
around poor surfacing.
8.2. Construction and Maintenance

Most bicycles have no suspension or shock absorbers and of Roads
many bicycles have relatively thin tyres inflated to high
pressures. Consequently, when a cyclist hits a pothole at Standard construction practices usually produce a riding
speed it is most uncomfortable, difficult to maintain con- surface that is of a high standard for cycling. The primary
trol and potentially hazardous for the cyclist. construction issue associated with roads is often the
process of construction itself, as discussed in more detail
Surface irregularities that are not noticeable in a motor below. However, the following issues are important:
vehicle on roads can make cycling unpleasant and slow
down the travel speed considerably. Maintenance stan- the riding surface for bicycles should be smooth and
dards for all roads, but particularly arterial roads and busy within the tolerances set out in Section 8.5.1. In the
local roads, should therefore require that the road surface case of sealed shoulders or sections of pavement used
in the left hand lane of the road is maintained to the high- exclusively by bicycles, the surface should be at least
est practicable standard. as smooth as the adjacent traffic lane or cyclists may
choose to ride in the traffic lane rather than on the
If bicycle lanes and paths are not maintained, cyclists are shoulder/bicycle lane section.
not likely to use them, or may swerve out of the designat-
ed lane in order to avoid surface irregularities thus creat- Asphalt mixes should be in accordance with the require-
ing a hazardous situation. ments set out in Section 8.5.2.1 (e.g. the aggregates used
for asphalt should not exceed a 10 mm nominal size);
In order to gain an appreciation of the problems faced by
cyclists with respect to maintenance it is suggested that road pavements should be regulated to be flush with
road maintenance supervisors should ride a bicycle over the edge of the gutter.
sections of road commonly used by cyclists. This enables Longitudinal vertical steps at the edges of asphalt
wearing course layers have become prevalent with the
use of Open Graded Friction Courses. As above, these
surface applications should be tapered to meet the
adjacent surface or edge of gutter;
the shoulders of roads in outer urban and rural areas

should preferably be sealed. If this can not be afforded
then the gravel shoulder should be maintained in good
condition with no drop off at the edge of the sealed
road pavement;
where the final surface layer of asphalt is to be

deferred, the edges of pit surrounds or service covers
should be regulated with cold-mix so that cyclists can
Figure 8-1: Grated Side Entry Pit providing for comfortably ride over the pit/cover until surfacing is
Smooth Ride for Cyclists complete;
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE 117
Regular maintenance activities on roads should ensure:
the pavement near the left kerb is free from potholes

and is not so worn as to create a `drop off';
regular sweeping so that the pavement near the road

edge is free of loose material, broken glass, oil and
water. This is important because debris from adjacent
lanes tends to accumulate in bicycle lanes as they are
not `swept' by motor traffic travelling in them;
spills on uphill grades from trucks carrying pre-mixed

concrete are removed as these can render the left hand
metre of pavement unusable to cyclists;
Figure 8-2: Grated Pit where Asphalt Surfacing has been

Delayed & No Regulation of Surface Provided
service covers and the like should be flush with the

road surface. Some are set too high while others
remain depressed following resurfacing of the road
with asphalt;
Figure 8-4: Concrete Spillage Causing `Rough Ride'
the pavement at crossings or along the length of rail-

way, tram and light rail services is well maintained.
The slots caused by the rails of these services are a
well known hazard for cyclists, particularly at inter-
sections and can only be exacerbated by poor surface
conditions in the adjacent pavement;
Figure 8-3: Resurfacing Leaving Junction Pit Depressed
gaps which develop between drainage grates, service
covers and the like, and the road pavement (refer
standard side entry pits and a moderate crossfall on the
Figure 8-5) are repaired, preferably by installing a
channel are preferred by cyclists. However, when it is
reinforced concrete collar flush with the grate/cover
necessary to use a grated pit the bars of the grate
and pavement; and
should be either at right angles or diagonal to the direc-
tion of travel. Grates with bars running parallel to the
direction of travel are acceptable provided that they are
configured in a manner that prevents:
- the entry of narrow bicycle tyres into the gaps; and
- any possible loss of control over the steering of a

bicycle due to a tyre being partially `wedged' or
`caught' by the bars.
preferably, bicycle lanes should not be delineated with

raised pavement markers or raised barriers, as these are
hazardous to cyclists.
In most instances it would be reasonable to assume a com-

prehensive program exists for the maintenance of roads,
from which cyclists benefit. Figure 8-5: Gap Between Grate & Road Pavement
118 BICYCLES
road markings and pavement symbols associated with

bicycle lanes are not be allowed to fade unreasonably
and are repainted regularly to maintain the integrity of
the facility and network.
Those in charge of road maintenance programs should

take advantage of the opportunities which re-surfacing
programs offer to provide wide kerbside lanes and elimi-
nate squeeze points by simply replacing the lane lines in a
slightly different position.
8.3. Construction and Maintenance

of Paths
Careful location, design and construction of paths for
cycling can reduce future maintenance requirements.
Careful attention to drainage, the location of vegetation Figure 8-6: Maintenance Operations on Asphalt Path
and the type of vegetation planted can assist in minimising
maintenance. A large amount of maintenance can be pre-
vented if debris is not washed onto paths, if the roots of
inappropriate plant species do not cause pavement damage

and trimming of overhead branches is not required.
The path alignment and cross section should be designed

to minimise the amount of debris, which can wash onto
the path surface. Paths adjacent to watercourses should be
located so that the likelihood of inundation and the result-
ing slippery surface is reduced (also see sect. 6.3.8).
Bushes that will not grow so tall as to obstruct sight dis-

tance should be planted on the inside of curves. Trees
should be chosen and planted away from the edge of paths
so as to minimise the likelihood of roots causing deforma-
tion and cracking of the path surface.
Most authorities would be aware of the financial implica-

Figure 8-7: Asphalt Path Requiring Maintenance
tions of failing to maintain roads, and yet it is not uncom-
mon for paths to be substantially neglected after construc-
tion. Paths for bicycles should be included in asset 8.4. Provision at Works
management programs in a similar manner to roads, to
ensure a safe and useable riding surface and also to avoid When construction and maintenance work is carried out
the increasing cost of maintenance or reconstruction as a involving trenching or other construction work across roads
result of the asset degradation. and paths, access for cyclists (and pedestrians in the case of
shared paths) should be maintained, and of a satisfactory
Regular maintenance activities on paths should include: quality to avoid the use of alternative routes which may be
hazardous or inconvenient, for cyclists (and pedestrians).
filling of cracks (see Figure 8-6);
Construction and maintenance works should be undertak-
trimming or removal of grass so that it does not intrude
en in such a way that these activities do not place cyclists
into the path (see Figure 8-7); at risk during the works period. This is particularly impor-
sweeping of paths to remove debris such as broken tant, for instance, where a sealed shoulder is closed for
glass and fine gravel (including that arising from maintenance on freeways and other high speed roads.
construction and maintenance activities such as crack Also, whilst different standards are sometimes applied to
sealing); paths, it is worth noting that an open trench in a road is
re-painting of pavement markings; potentially no less hazardous than one that is adjacent to a
well used path.
cleaning of signs; and
Detailed guidance on the requirements for access, and for
trimming of trees and shrubs to maintain safe clear- signing and delineation at work sites on or adjacent to
ances and sight distances. roads and paths, is provided in Appendix B.
8.5. Surfaces for Cycling All paths should therefore be designed to withstand at
least a fully laden small truck.
8.5.1. Tolerances Most paths should have a hard weatherproof surface.
The new pavement surface of a bicycle lane or path for Primarily they can be constructed as a flexible pavement
of crushed rock surfaced with asphalt or a bituminous seal,
cyclists should be shaped to match existing features such
or as a rigid concrete pavement.
as pit covers, edgings or driveways, to within 5 millime-
tres. It is desirable that the finished surface of a new bicy- It is vital that the sub-grade of both flexible and rigid pave-
cle lane or path does not: ments are compacted to a satisfactory standard and soft areas
are treated. It may be necessary in some cases to assess sub-
deviate from a 3 metre straight edge by more than 5
grade conditions along the line of the proposed path.
millimetres at any point; and
Typical cross-sections of flexible and rigid pavements are
have a rate of change in deviation in excess of 1 mm in
shown in Figure 8-8. Individual State and local govern-
240 mm.
ment authorities will have a preference for particular types
The surface of an existing bicycle lane or a path for of pavement based on experience using local materials
cyclists should not exceed the tolerances nominated in that should result in economical pavements. Appropriate
Table 8-1. The figures in the table are applicable to dis- pavement design advice should be sought in every
continuities in the surface of concrete and other sealed instance.
pavements, at the pavement/gutter interface, at interfaces Where paths are located on river banks and likely to
between the pavement surface and service covers, at fail- become inundated they should be constructed of concrete
ures and at subsidences and the like. to provide greater resistance to scour by flood water.
The table requirements may be difficult to achieve where Coloured pavement surfaces are used in some instances.
a pavement abuts an unsealed surface. However authori- For further discussion see Section 9.7.
ties should make every effort to limit the height of steps in
these locations as the affect of cyclists travelling along or 8.5.2.1. Bituminous Surface Pavements
across a step can be severe.
Flexible pavements have in the past been favoured in some
Whilst, no dimension is provided in relation to a groove jurisdictions because they are usually cheaper to construct
perpendicular to the direction of travel, this circumstance than concrete and have in general provided superior riding
should be treated as two steps if greater than 100 mm wide. qualities.
Grooves or steps with dimensions in excess of the figures A recent innovation has been the use of geofabric rein-
listed in Table 8-1 are potentially hazardous to cyclists. forced bituminous concrete and double spray seal pave-
ments. In additional to a typical flexible pavement design,
Not to Exceed (mm): examples of geofabric reinforced pavements are shown in
Figure 8-8. The spray seal version has been used as an
Width of Height of economical solution where significant sub-grade move-
Groove Step ment was expected.
Asphalt mixes should be similar to those used for lightly

12 10
trafficked streets. The aggregates used for asphalt should
not exceed 10 mm nominal size. In the case of sprayed
Perpendicular to seals, the aggregate size should not exceed 7 mm. Larger
20
Direction of Travel aggregates result in an unacceptably rough surface.
Source: Caltrans, 1995
Table 8-1: Existing Surface Tolerances 8.5.2.2. Concrete Pavements
The use of concrete paths can be beneficial on the basis of

8.5.2. Pavements for Bicycle Paths `whole of life' costs, but only where appropriate construc-
tion methods are employed. In general concrete paths have
The pavement of paths for cycling must be designed and
a longer life and are relatively unaffected by:
constructed to a standard which ensures a satisfactory level
of service for cyclists throughout the life of the facility. the deleterious effects of vegetation either at cracks or
The maintenance activities discussed above require the along the path edges;
use of a truck and other substantial machinery. If paths are low levels of maintenance;
not designed to carry the live loads imparted by this equip-
ment then pavements will suffer structural damage, which the absence of motor traffic (important to the condition
will affect use of the facility, and be expensive to repair. of bituminous pavements);
120 BICYCLES
0
-Flow C"JOW
bl_
teg
-+++YWtiwww. .w i-
1d)L
Figure 8-8: Typical Pavements for Paths
The development of advanced concrete path construction

techniques and products have resulted in significant
improvements in rider comfort. It is critical that such tech-
niques (see C&CAA, 1996, 1998) are employed. They
include:
preformed or saw-cut contraction joints. As a conse-

quence bull floating, trowelling and broom finishing
can be extended right up to the joints resulting in a
considerably improved riding surface. In particular,
wet formed contraction joints made using a grooving
tool, should be avoided. The sealing of contraction
joints may be important to minimise the ingress of dirt
and to limit weed growth amongst other benefits;
Figure 8-9: Asphalt Path (Croydon Park, NSW)
the use of extended bull floats (up to 4m wide) to avoid
long wave corrugations that affect cyclists travelling at
poor sub-grade conditions in some instances; and speed; and
occasional heavy traffic (in the case of reinforced narrower and fewer joints.
paths).
It is sometimes perceived that the contrast between the
Concrete paths should be of sufficient strength to resist colour of lines and concrete surfaces is insufficient.
cracking and differential vertical movement. A skid resis- Conversely, concrete paths are thought to offer a high stan-
tant surface finish should be provided by transverse dard of delineation for cycling in dark conditions. As for
brooming of the wet concrete. Similar attention should be other path surface types, it is important that pavement
given to the smoothness of path sections both at joints and markings are maintained on concrete paths to a high stan-
in between. dard, as illustrated by Figure 8-10.
The treatment may involve an asphalt overlay of the outer

1.0 metre sections of deck to provide a smooth, safe ride
for cyclists. Drainage ought not to be a problem with gaps
in the deck. At the very least warning signs should be pro-
vided on the approaches to bridges which have longitudi-
nal gaps in the deck.
Timber surfaces can be slippery in wet or shady condi-

tions. Where these circumstances are common, the appli-
cation of a non-slip finish as above is also desirable,
regardless of the alignment of planks.
Figure 8-10: Concrete Path (Highbury, SA)
8.5.2.3. Unsealed Paths
Consideration may be given to the provision of a stabilised

unsealed surface as the first stage of development:
where the volume of cyclists initially using the path is

expected to be low;
flat gradients exist (e.g. less than 3%);
to reduce costs; or
where the environmental amenity of an area will be

reduced by a sealed path.
The second stage would be the provision of an asphalt, or Figure 8-11: Bridge with Timber Deck
bituminous surface, or possibly of a concrete surface.
8.6. Quality Systems
Care should be taken in the selection of the (unsealed) sur-
face material to ensure that the riding surface is smooth 8.6.1. General
and well bound, as cyclists will not be attracted to a path Quality systems should ensure that when a road or path
which has a poor surface. Well graded river gravels are has to be òpened' or repaired, it is restored to the correct
most suitable. Materials that result in loose surfacing standards of compaction and surface quality so that the
should not be used under any circumstances. Good patch does not subside with the passing of time, and the
drainage is also an important factor in the success of surfacing of the patch does not have an abrupt edge.
gravel paths. Subsidence of backfill and pavement at trenches across
roads and paths is particularly concerning because cyclists
8.5.3. Timber Surfaces are unable to avoid a trench as they might avoid an isolat-
ed pothole.
Timber is a common surface material in the case of
bridges. Whilst it can present a satisfactory riding surface,
the use of an appropriate form of construction is important 8.6.2. Bicycle Safety Audits
to avoid any hazard for cyclists. It is important to focus on the needs of cyclists, as for
Gaps between longitudinal planks in timber bridge decks other road users in relation to the planning, design, main-
(see Figure 8-11) can trap bicycle wheels and cause seri- tenance and construction of road and path infrastructure.
ous injuries to cyclists. The implementation of a system of auditing in relation to
cycling facilities, either integrated with a similar process
On new timber bridges the planks should be placed per- for roads, or otherwise, is recognised as the most appro-
pendicular to the direction of travel of cyclists. In con- priate means of assessment for roads and paths.
structing and maintaining bridges it is important to ensure
that the deck joints at abutments and piers provide a Detailed guidance on auditing processes is provided by
smooth and hence safe passage for cyclists. AUSTROADS (1994). A broad listing of various issues of
concern in relation to cycling facilities is contained in
Consideration should therefore be given to remedial treat- Appendix A to assist the preparation of structured bicycle
ment of existing timber bridges with longitudinal planks. safety audit checklists.
122 BICYCLES
9 Traffic Control Devices

9.1. General 9.2. Regulatory Signs
A traffic control device is any sign, signal or pavement Regulatory signs are used to formally establish and termi-
marking, which is placed or erected for the purpose of reg- nate a bicycle lane or path for cycling under existing reg-
ulating, warning or guiding road and bicycle facility users. ulations, and to control bicycle movements on the road
Such devices are provided to aid the safe and orderly system, particularly at intersections. They form the basis
movement of bicycle traffic and motor vehicle traffic. for traffic regulations regarding priority and other driver
Therefore, uniform design and application is desirable behaviour. These signs should be provided on all paths for
both within States and nationally, if confusion and poten- cycling and bicycle lanes in accordance with relevant State
tially hazardous situations are to be avoided and cyclists traffic regulations, as the minimum signage requirement.
are to navigate bicycle networks with ease. However, where traffic volumes are low and motorists are
not likely to utilise a bicycle lane, an edge line and bicy-
Uniformity of design and application facilitates identifica- cle pavement symbols will usually be sufficient.
tion by all road users and is particularly useful to visitors

to an area and those using a facility for the first time. The Regulatory signs also include `Give Way' signs and `Stop'
relevant parts of the Australian Standard Manual of signs specifically provided on paths where it is necessary to
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (AS 1742) are: enforce that cyclists either give way to cyclists using an
intersecting path or to motor vehicles using an intersecting
Part 2 - Traffic Control Devices for General Use right of way. They would normally only be used where sight
distance is restricted and cannot be improved, or where a
Part 9 - Bicycle Facilities safety problem has developed. The signs can be half the size
of those recommended for use on the road system because of
A selection of the signs most widely used for bicycle facil-
the relatively lower approach speeds (also see Section 9.2.7).
ities is included in these guidelines.
Commonly used signs relating to bicycles are discussed in
Guidance on choice of size, installation and other details detail in the sections below.
is provided in AS 1742.9.
Those charged with the responsibility of developing signs 9.2.1. Bicycle Lane Designation
and line marking schemes for bicycle routes or paths The sign in Figure 9-1(a) is used to legally establish an
should check that proposed signs are enforceable under exclusive bicycle or a bicycle/car parking lane on the road
the relevant traffic regulations. carriageway so that motorists are advised of the legal
status of the lane and traffic regulations can be enforced.
Signs are costly and where used on remote sections of
Supplementary plates such as that shown in Figure 9-1(b)
paths for cycling are often subject to vandalism. An exces-
may also be used to specify times of operation. Where
sive number of signs can diminish the amenity of a facili-
necessary, this sign is also used to terminate the lane by
ty and distract users. For these reasons signing and pave-
the addition of the supplementary ÈND' plate shown in
ment marking schemes for bicycle facilities should be as
Figure 9-1(c).
simple as possible, providing the minimum number of
signs necessary to comply with traffic regulations, to warn
cyclists of potential hazards and to direct cyclists to their 9.2.2. Exclusive Bicycle Path Designation
destinations and services. Where available, signs can be
The sign in Figure 9-2 is used to legally establish a path
erected on existing posts or support structures to reduce provided exclusively for bicycles. It informs pedestrians
costs and the number of potential safety hazards.
and motorists of the purpose of the path and permits traf-
Bicycle facility signs are categorised as:
fic regulations to be enforced. Where necessary, it is also
used in conjunction with the ÈND' plate in Figure 9-1(c)
regulatory; to terminate the path.
warning; or
guide. 9.2.3. Shared Use Path Designation
The colour used for signs shall comply with those speci- The sign in Figure 9-3 is used at the beginning of shared
fied in AS 1743 Road Signs - Specifications. paths to establish the legal status of the path. It is also used
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 123
a) Sign No. R7.14 Sign No. R8-3

,I: or'R*
.r {'L; illust ated)
Figure 9-4: Separated Path Sign
b) n No. A9-1-2
c) Sign No. 7-4
Figure 9-1: Bicycle Lane Sign
Figure 9-5: Bicycle Prohibition Sign
SIgn No. R8-1
Sign No. GS-60
Figure 9-2: Exclusive Bicycle Path Sign
Figure 9-6: Bicycle Control Sign
n No. P8-2 WAY

Sign No. R1-2
Figure 9-3: Shared Use Path Sign Figure 9-7: Give Way Sign
124 BICYCLES
at the end of these paths in conjunction with a supplemen- 9.2.8. `Bicycles Excepted' Signs
tary ÈND' plate [Figure 9-1(c)].
The signs in Figure 9-8 are examples of general traffic
signs which are used to prohibit motor vehicles from enter-
9.2.4. Separated Path Designation ing particular streets or areas, usually to improve traffic
flow on a major road or to prevent the intrusion of through
The sign shown in Figure 9-4 is used at the beginning of
traffic into sensitive areas. In most cases these same restric-
paths on which pedestrian and bicycle traffic is intended to
tions should not apply to bicycles in which case the signs
be separated. The areas to be used by each user group are
can be easily modified by the words `BICYCLES
usually indicated by a longitudinal painted line and by the
EXCEPTED' on either the sign or a supplementary plate.
sign. Contrasting surfacing may also be utilised in which
case the painted line may be omitted, but the sign must
always be provided. The sign is also used in conjunction 9.3. Warning Signs
with an ÈND' plate to terminate the separated path.
Warning signs should only be used where a hazard is not
obvious to approaching drivers and riders and the provi-
9.2.5. Bicycle Prohibition sion of the sign is necessary for safety. If installed, the sign
should be far enough from the hazard to allow for a driver
The sign in Figure 9-5 is used at locations beyond which a or cyclist to react and stop at the operating speed of the
cyclist is not permitted to proceed whilst riding a bicycle. road or path.
The sign in Figure 9-9(a) is used to warn motorists of the

9.2.6. Bicycle Control Sign fact that cyclists are likely to be using the road ahead and,
The sign in Figure 9-6 is used at locations where it is nec- when used with the supplementary plate in Figure 9-9(b),
essary to direct cyclists to follow a certain route. that cyclists are likely to be crossing or entering the road
in the vicinity of the sign.
9.2.7. Give Way Sign The sign in Figure 9-9(c) is used to warn cyclists using
off-road paths that they are approaching an intersection
The sign in Figure 9-7 is used in a similar manner as for with a road and should only be used in situations where
roads, predominantly to emphasise `right of way' regula- cyclists cannot identify the presence of an intersection
tions where different path types meet. Under some regula- from a distance which will enable them to stop safely.
tions, it may not have a legal function.
The signs shown in Figure 9-10 might be useful in appro-
The sign can be deployed at intersections of the various priate circumstances. The sign in Figure 9-10(a), together
path types, including footpaths. It is also useful in high- with Figure 9-9(b), warns drivers that cyclists and pedes-
lighting the point where a path meets a road, in the event trians might be encountered at the crossing. The signs in
that the intersection is not obvious under all conditions or Figure 9-10(b) and Figure 9-10(c) are used to warn
if particular concerns exist for the safety of cyclists. cyclists of a steep downhill grade or a slippery surface
respectively.
Give Way signs should also be used at 4-way intersections
of paths, in accordance with the established principles of There are other situations in practice for which Australian
codes of practice for roads. Standard warning signs have not been developed.
Figure 9-8: Modified Signs

Examples of these include warning signs for low clearance along paths between junctions to reassure cyclists that
and flooding in situations where a drainage culvert is they are on the right path. A maximum spacing of 3
utilised as a road or rail underpass for cyclists. Others kilometres is suggested which relates to 12 minutes
would be situations where a path narrows unexpectedly, a cycling at 15 km/h; a reasonable balance between
tight curve is not obvious to cyclists able to approach at cyclists needs and cost;
high speed or where a `blind corner' exists because of
physical constraints on path alignment. In such situations, on the adjacent road system to guide cyclists to a path;
new signs should be designed in accordance with the prin- on paths directing cyclists to important services such
ciples on which the Australian Standard is based. as toilets, water, and food shops; or
9.4. Guide Signs along roads where the bicycle route is not obvious
through pavement marking (e.g. route turns a corner or
Guide signs are very important to cyclists as they define roads are being used to connect sections of path)
the route and provide necessary information to enable
cyclists to conveniently find their way around the network. The importance of these signs becomes evident in using
routes which utilise a number of local streets and off-road
Guide signs are required: paths, and which may follow watercourses, and hence
change direction frequently thus causing cyclists to
at all junctions between paths specifying key destina- become confused as to their location.
tions (e.g. suburbs, universities, recreational facilities
etc.) and distances to those destinations; The bicycle route marker sign shown in Figure 9-11(a) is
used as the primary symbol to define on- road routes. The

at all junctions between paths and roads specifying the route marker sign should be deployed in conjunction with
name of the intersecting road, key destinations and dis- useful information such as a destination and distance as
tances to those destinations; illustrated in Figure 9-11(b).
No. W6- c) Sign No. W6-8
Figure 9-9: Cyclist Warning Signs 1
Wi
a) c)
Figure 9-10: Cyclist Warning Signs 2

126 BICYCLES
It is beneficial when providing guide signs throughout a

bicycle network to establish a system of principal and
intermediate destination signs. Principal destinations are
likely to be up to 20 km apart, whereas the intermediate
destinations are up to 5 km. The principal destinations on
the signs will enable users to orientate themselves in rela-
a) Sign No. 68.14
tion to these `focal points'. The intermediate destination A
signs provide information on the progress of users along
the route, and also direct them to the various destinations.
Guide signs should normally show both the principal and
the next intermediate destination and as an intermediate
destination is reached, its name is replaced with the name
of the next one.
The bicycle route marker may be used in conjunction with

various supplementary plates to provide the name of the
A
route, directions from the route to destinations and the A
existence of special facilities such as parking. Examples of
b)
these plates are shown in Figure 9-12.
Other examples in relation to parking facilities are shown

in Section 10 of this guide. The signs may simply be finger

board signs utilising standard signing symbols as shown in
Figure 9-13.
On recreational routes it is desirable to provide direction

and location signs for toilets, drinking water, shops and
places of interest. Where routes pass through river valleys Figure 9-11: Bicycle Route Marker Signs
Sign No.
68.15
a) b) c)
Figure 9-12: Supplementary Signs
m l
all a ion
Figure 9-13: Finger Board Signs

and parkland it may also be desirable to provide signs of 9.5. Other Useful Signs
an environmentally sensitive design.
A number of other signs that are considered to be useful in
appropriate circumstances, are discussed below. Other
special signs may be required to suit unusual situations.
The sign shown in Figure 9-17 is a temporary sign which

could be utilised on paths, road shoulders and bicycle
lanes to warn cyclists during the short period of time
between surface damage being reported and repairs being
effected.
Figure 9-14: Trail Identification Signs - Victoria

Figure 9-17: Temporary Sign
The sign shown in Figure 9-18 should be used to warn

cyclists of the existence of hazardous gaps between planks
in bridge decks. It should only be used where the number
of cyclists using the road is negligible or where it is not
economically or practically feasible to solve the problem
of gaps in the deck.
Figure 9-15: Bicycle Route Sign (Unley, SA)
Sign No. G9-58
Figure 9-16: Guide Sign for Cyclists Figure 9-18: Gaps in Deck Sign
128 BICYCLES
The sign shown in Figure 9-19 is a sign used to provide an Tactile linemarking can be used for lines separating
instruction to motorists at locations where it is critical that motor-vehicle traffic lanes and that area of road carriage-
they look out for cyclists. It may be used at the following ways used by cyclists. This is desirable in relation to the
locations where cyclists are experiencing operational or comfort and safety of cyclists where:
safety problems.
curves exist;
where a road or carriageway narrows and creates a
squeeze point for cyclists; high proportion of commercial traffic exists on narrow
carriageways;
at `5 lane' and `S lane' treatments where cyclists are
squeezed for space; or traffic speeds are high;
at the start of diverge tapers and the end of merge visibility of cyclists is poor and limited time or oppor-
tapers. tunity exists to take evasive action in the event of traf-
fic crossing into the section of road used by cyclists; or
It may also be placed below the Stop, Give Way and
Roundabout regulatory signs at intersections to instruct driver fatigue is a potential problem.
motorists that they may encounter a cyclist passing Generally, the 1.8 metre * 1.1 metre bicycle pavement
through the intersection. Typical locations may include the symbol shown in Figure 9-22 is used on roads.
following:
Bicycle pavement symbols should not be applied in
On the approaches to multi-lane roundabouts or large manoeuvring or braking areas of road carriageways (e.g.
single lane roundabouts; or at intersection approaches), or otherwise should have suit-

On left turn slip lanes where left turning traffic is pro- able non-slip qualities.
vided with a merge taper or an auxiliary lane. Bicycle pavement symbols can be used on sealed shoul-
ders and kerbside lanes where few parked and moving
motor vehicles use the lane and it is desired to indicate the
presence of cyclists without the expense and formality of
regulatory signs (refer 4.4.4, 4.4.6 and 4.4.7).
9.6.1.2. Safety Strip
A `safety strip' separating parked cars and bicycle lanes

should be provided in the following circumstances:
bicycle/car parking lanes with parallel car parking

(sect. 4.4.2.1);
bicycle/car parking lanes with angle car parking (sect.

4.4.2.2); or
contra-flow bicycle lanes (sect. 4.4.3)
Sign No. G9.57 The purpose of the safety strip is to limit the potential use
of the bicycle and/or parking lanes by moving vehicles,
Figure 9-19: `Watch for Bicycles' Sign particularly when the parking demand is minimal. It is
also intended to channel the paths of cyclists away from
cars, to allow for the opening of car doors, or as an addi-
9.6. Pavement Markings tional reminder to drivers as to the potential presence of
Pavement markings include linemarking, pedestrian and cyclists.
bicycle symbols, and arrows. These are used to guide the
With reference to Figure 9-21, a safety strip may consist
movement of bicycle and motor traffic, to provide support
of or be distinguished by the following:
to regulatory signs and as regulatory controls.
a) Diagonal marking in accordance with AS 1742.2, in
9.6.1. Roads the area of the safety strip.
9.6.1.1. General b) Distinctive pavement surface finish (e.g. paved), in the

area of the safety strip.
The typical requirements for lanes are shown in Figure
9-20. Bicycle lanes on roads are defined by 100 mm wide c) Distinctive pavement surface finish (sect. 9.7) in the
solid white lines. area of the bicycle lane.
I
Sign and Pavement Symbol Sign and Pavement Symbol
at end of Bicycle Lane IIANE at start of Bicycle Lone
Sign and Pavement Symbol t

I E1
at departure side of intersection 1
I
t
it
Pavement Symbol at approach Pavement Symbol opposite
side of intersection approach side of junction
Intermediate Pavement symbols

at 200m intervals (max.)
Intermediate signs at m
w E
intervals (max.)
Figure 9-20: Typical Treatment of Bicycle Lane

130 BICYCLES
C ipeive
pow0wo
NVI
(0) tua of mow"
Figure 9-21: Safety Strip Layout Options
In every instance, either an unbroken line or parking space Bicycle and pedestrian symbols, and arrows (refer
markings should be provided between the bicycle lane and Figure 9-22) provide a very useful method of advising
the car parking lane (or area e.g. in the case of angle of the presence of pedestrians and bicycles as well as
parking). the correct use of paths. These markings also reinforce
regulatory path control signs. Generally, the 0.8 metre
9.6.2. Paths *0.49 metre pavement symbol is used for paths.
In general, the linework for paths should conform to the Where necessary the bicycle pavement symbols can be
requirements contained in this guide or with AS 1742.9, as supplemented by directional arrows to indicate the per-
appropriate. Where circumstances exist that are beyond missible directions of travel. This is desirable where path
the provisions of these documents, consideration should volumes are significant, to encourage users to travel on the
be given to common practices used for the marking of left side. With reference to Section 6.6.2.2, it may also be
roads, possibly as prescribed by AS 1742.2 or local codes desirable to supplement pedestrian pavement symbols
of practice. with arrows to indicate the permissible directions of travel.
Off-road paths may utilise the following types of lines. Figure 6-44 details a desirable arrangement of pavement
symbols and arrows used along shared use paths where
A separation line should be used to separate opposing significant path volumes exist.
bicycle traffic movements on heavily trafficked sections
of paths or where sight lines are restricted. They also
serve a valuable function for cyclists riding at night. 9.7. Pavement Surface Colour
An edge line may be used to delineate paths particu- Coloured pavement surfaces are a common feature of
larly where there are frequent and/or low standard bicycle lanes and paths in Europe. Red pavement surfaces
curves, to delineate obstructions and fences etc. at the usually denote a bicycle facility in The Netherlands and
edge of paths, or where paths are well used in dark Germany. Blue pavement surfaces are used in Denmark.
conditions (e.g. by commuters).
It is important that the use of coloured pavement surfaces
A continuity line may be used to delineate the edge of is consistent nationally, or at least throughout a State, to
the path of through bicycle traffic across an intersect- promote recognition of those facilities constructed for the
ing path, or to indicate the end of a path. exclusive use of cyclists, in particular.
A stop line or give way line is desirable at path inter- Care needs to be exercised in the choice of coloured or
sections where it is necessary to provide a Stop sign or textured surfaces. Red and orange are widely used for
a Give Way sign. footpath paving in some States and cities, and as such may
300mm
E
0E
E
(1) 0E
0
cv
(2)
100 m
1.
Pavement Symbol (1) (2)
for Roads 1800 1100
for Paths 800 490
for Porkin 250 160
Refer AS1742.9 for further detoiis on each of these markings.
Figure 9-22: Bicycle, Pedestrian and Arrow Pavement Symbols
be inappropriate in those regions. A colour/texture combi- The colouring of pavement surfaces are achieved in dif-
nation resulting in a unique surface image and that con- ferent ways. In the case of asphalt surfaced bicycle lanes
trasts with adjoining surfaces, should be the objectives of or paths, coloured binders and/or a light coloured aggre-
the provision of bicycle facilities with alternative surface gate can be used to create the desired appearance.
finishes. The choice of surface image also needs to
account for other factors including aesthetic considera- Concrete paths can be coloured or textured through the use
tions and community opinion. of oxides, pigments or coloured surface hardeners.
Stencilled or patterned concrete surfaces can also be used.
Where provisions for cyclists exist at intersections but Stamped or impressed finishes may not be appropriate
safety problems continue to be a source of frustration, depending on the depth of the impression, due to the affect
consideration could be given to the use of coloured (and on smoothness of the riding surface. It is important that
possibly textured) bicycle lanes, to highlight the position the surface finish be of a skid resistant type.
of bicycle lanes.
On separated paths it is desirable to provide contrasting
Whilst shared use paths can be coloured, they should not surfaces to delineate the areas for cyclists and pedestrians;
be coloured and textured in the same manner as on-road a coloured or textured pavement surface or brick paving
bicycle lanes or exclusive use paths, or with the bicycle might be used. A more highly textured or brick paving sur-
sections of separated use paths. The association of a spe- face would be used for the pedestrian path as it is likely to
cific colour/texture combination with bicycles, on a con- have a rougher finish thus discouraging cyclists from
sistent basis, is an important means of highlighting the encroaching onto the pedestrian path.
potential presence of cyclists.
132 BICYCLES
10 End of Trip Facilities
10.1. General jogging, aerobics, gym work outs), perhaps as part of cor-
porate fitness programs which are of benefit to companies
It is important that adequate facilities are provided at in terms of employee fitness and health.
common destinations of bicycle trips. Bicycle parking
facilities may be installed as a result of the outcomes of Where possible, showers and lockers should be located
Local Strategic Bicycle Plans, urban planning strategies or close to secure bicycle parking facilities.
on a individual demand basis. Necessary facilities include
showers, lockers and parking facilities.
10.3. Parking
10.2. Showers and Lockers 10.3.1. General
The role that cycling could play in replacing the many
Australian Standard AS 2890.3 contains information on

short trips undertaken by car is described in Section 2. To bicycle parking, some of which has been reproduced
effect substantial change in travel modes requires the cre- below for the convenience of users of this Guide.
ation of an environment in which people can cycle safely
and comfortably. In order to make bicycle trips in excess Parking for cyclists falls into three broad categories:
of five kilometres attractive to people it is necessary that
clean, functional, secure, showers and changing facilities all-day parking for employees and students;
be provided in the workplace. all-day/part day parking at public transport stations,
In the case of existing buildings the size of the facility interchanges and terminuses; or
should be based on the potential demand for use. A staff short term parking for visitors to shopping centres,
meeting or questionnaire can determine this. In the case of offices, and other institutions.
new developments planning ordinances should impose
minimum requirements. Separate facilities should be pro- All-day parking requires a high level of security to prevent
vided for males and females and the facility should be others from tampering with the bicycle, or stealing the
located so that users and their belongings have a high level bicycle or parts of it. Long term parking therefore involves
of security. A we] I ventilated locker should be provided for the provision of personal bicycle lockers, cages, or com-
each user for storage of cycling attire and equipment. pounds. Cages and compounds should not only have a
locked gate but also provide for the frame and both wheels
The provision of showers and lockers is beneficial to all to be locked to a rail within the enclosure. Short term park-
employees, including people who travel to work by jog- ing provides a lower level of security by means of parking
ging or long distance walking. Showers and lockers will rails to which the frame and both wheels may be locked.
also be useful to people who exercise at lunchtime (e.g.
Table 10-1 provides a guide to the number of bicycle park-
ing spaces which should be provided for various land uses.
10.3.2. Need for Secure Bicycle Parking

In the past a low priority has been given to the provision
of secure parking facilities with respect to both type and
location. The result has been an increase in the theft of
bicycles or accessories and this has been a deterrent to
cycling and a liability to the community, not only in terms
of the costs of the stolen items, but also with respect to the
costs incurred in attempting to recover them. For example,
the Insurance Council of Australia (Bulletin July 1987)
estimated that the total value of bicycles stolen throughout
Australia each year was more than seven million dollars
and that only a small percentage (7% to 15%) of them are
recovered by police.
END OF TRIP FACILITIES 133
EMPLOYE ESIDE VISITOR/SHOPPER

AND USE CLASS CLASS
PARKING SPACES PAR G SPACES
Amusement Parlour 1or2 2 plus I per 50m2 gfa 3

Apartment house I per 4 habitable rooms I per 16 habitable rooms 3
Art Gallery I per 15 2 gfa 2 2 + I per 1500m2 gfa 3
Bank I per 200m2 gfa 2 2 3
Cafe I per 25m2 public a 2 2 3
Community Centre I per 1500m2 gfa 2 2+1 per I500m2 gfa 3
Consulting Rooms I per 8 practitioners 2 I per 4 practitioners 3
Drive-in Shopping Centre I per 300m2 sales floor I per 500m2 sales floor
Flat I per 3 flats I per 12 flats 3
General Hospital I per 15 beds 1 per 30 beds 3
General Industry 1 or2 3
Health Centre I per I or 2 I per 2 3
Hotel I per 25m2 bar floor area & I per 1 per 25m2 bar floor area & I per 3
I 2 lounge, r garden l 2 lounge, beer garden 3
It
Indoor Recr Facility I per 4 employees l or 2 I per 2

Libr I per 500m2 gfa I or 2 4 plus 2 per 200m2 gfa 3
Light Industry I per 1 2 gfa I or 2

Major Sports Ground I per 1500 spectator places I per 250 specs. place 3
Market 2 It per 10 stalls 3
motel I per 40 rooms 3
Museum Iper15 2gfa 2 & I per 1500m2 gfa 3
Nursing Home I per 7 beds 1 per, 60 beds 3
Office I per 200m2 gfa I or 2 1 per 750m2 over I m2 3
Place of Assembly 2 3
Public Hall 1 or2 3.
Residential Building I per 4 lodging rooms I per 16 lodging rooms 3

Restaurant I per 100m2 public area 1 or 2 2 3
Retail Show Room I per 75 1 1 per I ant sales floor 3
School 1 per 5 pupils over year 4 2 3
Service Industry 1 per 2 gfa 3
Service Premises l per 2 2 gfa l - 3
l per 50 ml over I m2
Shop I per 300m2 gfa 1 3
Swimming Pool 1 or 2 2 per 20m2 of pool area 3
Take-Away I per I per 50m2 gfa 3
University/inst. of Tech. I per I OOff/t studen 1 or 2 3
2 per lOOflt students 2 3
Notes:
1. *-'indicates that no parking demand information is available, and therefore planners should make their own assess-
ment of the required bicycle parking provisions, on an individual project basis.
2, gfa - Gross floor area.
3. It is sometimes appropriate to make available 50% of the level of provision recommended in the table at the initial
installation stage, however space should be set aside to allow 100% provision in the event that the full demand for
bicycle parking is realised.
Source: Bawd on SBC 195Th
Table 10-1: Bicycle Parking - Provision for Planning Purposes

134 BICYCLES
Provision of secure bicycle parking facilities is necessary shopping centres or in small clusters near the entrances
if the level of theft and the cost to the community is to be to major shopping complexes or offices.
reduced.
In public areas, especially in prominent locations, every
endeavour should be made to provide attractive, well
10.3.3. General Requirements of Devices
designed facilities. The need for an aesthetic appearance
In general every bicycle parking device should: should not, however, override the requirements for securi-
ty and ease of use.
enable wheels and frame to be locked to the device
without damaging the bicycle; 10.3.5. Types of Parking Devices
be placed in public view (i.e. where they can be viewed
There are three classes of bicycle parking facilities that
by passers-by, shopkeepers, station attendants, teach- offer various levels of security, from high to low. These
ers or fellow workers); classes and the main types of user are described in Table
be located outside pedestrian movement paths; 10-2. Bicycle parking devices that do not allow the frame
and both wheels to be conveniently and effectively locked
be easily accessible from the road; to the facility cannot be regarded as secure.
be arranged so that parking and unparking manoeuvres
will not damage adjacent bicycles; Security
Clas Description Main User Type
Level
I
be protected from manoeuvring motor vehicles and
High Fully enclosed Bike and ride

opening car doors;
individual lockers commuters at
be as close as possible to the cyclist's ultimate railway and tats
destination;
be well lit by appropriate existing or new lighting; Medium Locked
be protected from the weather; and fitted with Class 3 emp
facility. ts, regal
be designed to fit in harmony with the surrounding Communal access bike and ride
environment. g duplicate keys commuters.
or electronic swipe
10.3.4. Location of Bicycle Parking Facilities cards.
Bicycle parking facilities should be provided at common Law Facilities to which Shoppers, visitors
commuting and recreational destinations of bicycle trips. the bicycle frame to public offices.
These locations include schools, shopping centres, railway and wheels can be Places of
stations, bus terminals and interchanges, work places, locked. employment
sports grounds, cafe's, cinemas, theatres etc.. Secure, long where there is
term, weather protected parking should be provided for
workers and multi mode commuters, and secure short term supervision of the
parking should be provided for visitors, customers or parking facilities.
couriers. The locations of these facilities should be identi-
fied on bicycle network maps made available to the public. Table 10-2: Classification of Bicycle Parking Facilities
If parking facilities are not conveniently located cyclists (a) The Bicycle Locker
will ignore the facility and continue the disorderly practice
of securing bicycles to nearby railings, posts, seats, parking Bicycle lockers such as those shown in Figure 10-3 offer
meters, trees etc. Short-term parking, in particular, needs to the highest level of bicycle parking security currently
be very convenient if it is to be effective. Parking facilities available. They are appropriate for all day and night park-
are more effective if provided in small clusters close to var- ing, the most common venue being railway stations and
ious destinations rather than as one large parking area. bus terminals to encourage the use of multi mode travel.
They should also be considered at other locations where
Experience has shown that: passive surveillance is not available. They have the added
advantage that helmets and other gear can be securely
long term parking should generally be provided no
more than 100 metres from the cyclists destination; stored along with the bicycle, perhaps overnight, thus
giving the cyclists more flexibility in their travel arrange-
and
ments. It is important that the use of lockers is managed by
parking rails for short term parking should be placed an appropriate authority such as the managers of the rele-
individually every 20 to 30 metres throughout strip vant shopping centre, major building or railway station.
Users of bicycle lockers should not be allowed to supply It is recommended that lockers of similar size and layout
their own locks as lockers may end up being appropriated to those shown in Figure 10-3(b), be arranged so that the
by occasional users and remain empty and locked. It is separation between locker units is not less than 2.0 metres.
essential that those responsible for the management of the
lockers supply the locks for a fee, retain a duplicate key to (b) Bicycle Enclosure
enable regular checking of the usage, and maintain a reg- Bicycle enclosures offer a medium level of security in that
ister of regular users. Alternatively, a coin deposit operat- while the owner can lock the bicycle within the enclosure,
ed system may be preferred although this will not remove other users also have access to the enclosure. They are also
the need for occasional checking of usage. suitable for all day parking at locations such as railway
Lockers should normally be situated in a well lit public stations, workplaces and schools. Because there are many
place to deter vandalism. Lockers used in locations close users involved and the bicycles are easily seen they are not
to the sea should be fabricated from materials that will as secure as lockers and hence some level of surveillance
resist corrosion. should be provided to ensure satisfactory operation. Public
lighting is desirable where they are located in a public
place and used after dark.
A cage suitable for railway stations or workplaces is

shown in Figure 10-4 while a compound layout suitable
for use at schools is shown in Figure 10-6. The aisle
widths suitable for various bicycle parking angles are
shown in Table 10-3.
In some cases commercially produced standard sized

enclosures may provide an economical alternative for a
bicycle enclosure.
Where space is limited, and with staff agreement, it may

be acceptable to provide an enclosure designed for vertical
Figure 10-2: Bicycle Lockers
storage of bicycles. Figure 10-8 illustrates a device suit-
able for vertical storage although some systems allow for
the bicycle to be suspended from a hook.
urn. Aisle Width I

of Parking
( )
Horizontal Storage*
90° angle 1,5
60° angle 1,3
45° angle 1,1
30° angle 1.1
Vertical Storage 2.0
* Refer Figure 10-11
Table 10-3: Bicycle Parking Aisle Widths

b) Typioal double, aided layout
(c) Bicycle Parking Rails
2310
I The parking rail shown in Figure 10-10 is amongst the
most versatile methods of bicycle parking currently avail-
able in that it is:
low in cost;
easily fabricated, in mild steel with chain insert for
extra security if required;
able to be located close to cyclist destinations;
suited to short and medium term parking; and

C) Typl rant or SwKoe: AS 3
also able to be used for longer term parking if a high
Figure 10-3: Bicycle Locker Design Examples level of surveillance can be provided.
View A
NOTE: May be enclosed in cage with door and communal tock
provided bicycles can be secured Individually
SwxmAS2W,3
Figure 10-8: Bicycle Storage - Parking Module for Vertical Racks
These devices are successful largely because cyclists can standard car parking spaces where use is converted to
lock the frame and wheels to the rail if they so desire. The bicycle parking (refer Figure 10-13).
ability to locate them in well lit public places results in a rea-
sonable level of security even without organised surveil-
lance. Care must be taken in locating the rails so that they do
not unnecessarily restrict pedestrian movement along foot-
paths or impede opening of the doors of parked cars. They
W
should also be located with motorists sight lines in mind.
Parking rails are particularly suitable for use at the fol-

lowing locations.
individually or in small groups close to several desti-

nations such as at entrances to individual shops or
shopping centres, or work places.;
recreational centres or swimming pools;
at railway stations; and Figure 10-9: Group of Parking Rails at Railway Station
11
A I
E
E
ie
800mm NOTE: May be bolted to

50mm die. tube concrete footpath
Figure 10-10: Parking Rail

138 BICYCLES
1700
Parking Rails NOTE." Distance ean

rails to be at least
2000mm where
pedestrian movement
is required between
bicycle parking units
a) NOSE TO TAIL PARKING BOTH SIDES OF RAIL
1700 1700
C z/ ,, / i I .._../_ ./
WaII d Fence 1
b) NOSE TO TAIL PARKING AGAINST A WALL OR FENCE
Parking Angle
1
as shown in
Table 10-3
c) SIDE BY SIDE 90° PARKING

Walt or Fence
Wall or Fe
/9-
r1
d) SIDE BY SIDE ANGLE PARKING OTHER THAN 90* Source; SaSed on AS .3
Figure 10-11: Typical Bicycle Parking Modules

Kerb
Carriageway
a) NOSE TO TAIL
SHOP SUPERMARKET
Parking
Motor Vehicle Parting
Kerb
c way Z
Clearance to centre fine of rail
1 600 adjacent to low sp road (ac 60 h)
1800 adjacent to high speed road (> 60kmfi)
or parked vehicles (ie no indented parking)
b) SIDE BY SIDE
NOTE: Clearances are based on minim requirements specified in AS 2890.3

which provides for 600mm clearance eon the bicycle storage space
and kerb where speed limit is less than 8Okmfh,
1000mm where s limit Is greater than 60km/h
and 1200mm minimum for passage of pedestrians
Source Based on AS 2894.3
Figure 10-12: Typical Layouts of Parking Rails on Footpaths
Figure 10-11 shows the space module required for bicy- Where a parking rail is used for long term parking, say at
cles to be parked nose-to-tail and side by side whilst a railway station, the public transport authority should
Figure 10-12 shows typical layouts for the use of leaning provide a chain and padlock guard designed to prevent the
rails on footpaths. Other arrangements may be considered chain or padlock being cut with bolt cutters.
provided they are designed in accordance with the module,
clearances and aisle widths described above. For example, Where bicycle parking is required and a wall exists
a radial arrangements may be appropriate at a recreational nearby, an effective device is a horizontal parking rail
centre depending on the space available. fixed directly to the wall enabling the bicycle to be leant
140 BICYCLES
170 0
1700
P *ng Rob
""vow
--*--
both SWOS "f-
Sq
ble Padift
)
1I: s4ctes
NOTE: 1. A be lrW to pmtw bbicycies from da a by
2. Sign posft or phy may be required to or prevent a ss to the

area by motorCyc
AS 2M3
Figure 10-13: Car Parking Space Conversion for Bicycle Parking
against the rail, with a bracket mounted at the correct not meet the requirements of this guide and AS 2890.3
height to facilitate locking, as shown in Figure 10-14. These installations should be replaced progressively
giving priority to those where the security risk is greatest.
(d) Other Acceptable Parking Devices Specific problems related to these types of racks and
The road authority, planning authority, developer or owner stands are:
may wish to install alternative commercially available as only the front wheel can be secured to the rack the
bicycle parking devices. These parking devices may be remainder of the bicycle can be easily stolen;
satisfactory provided if they are designed and installed in
accordance with the principles of good practice described some traditional racks intended for a number of bicy-
above. For example, some councils have shown an interest cles to be parked side by side are used by cyclists as a
in providing coin operated devices which can be set to any leaning rail in order to achieve greater security thus
desired fee or to return a nominal fee after use. They preventing the device from being used as intended;
should be designed as to minimise the opportunity of theft.
It is suggested that any fee should be small or cyclists will they do not provide adequate stability for the bicycles
not use the facility and as a consequence may park their and can result in damage to the bicycles; and
bicycles in undesirable locations. devices having slots in the ground often have dirt and
(e) Unacceptable Parking Devices debris fill the slot making them difficult to use.
A variety of racks and stands have been used over a long 10.3.6. Signs and Markings Showing Location
period of time. However, racks and stands which allow and Purpose of Parking Facilities
only one wheel to be locked to the device or which support
the bicycle by only one wheel are not recommended for Signs should be provided to direct cyclists to storage units or
use. Such devices do not provide proper support or securi- devices and thus encourage their use. Storage units and other
ty for the bicycle as a whole. They do not meet the require- devices, the purpose of which may not be immediately obvi-
ments of AS 2890.3 and should not be used in new instal- ous (e.g. rails), must have instructional signs. Maps and pam-
lations. It is recognised that many existing installations do phlets can be produced to publicise the location of facilities.
In
Figure 10-14: Wall Mounted Bracket and Rail
fts VPIW On
A An" Amnk- -A-
x rrl$n
s
Figure 10-15: Information Signs for Bicycle Parking Facilities
142 BICYCLES
Australian Standard AS 2890.3 suggests the use of the

standard bicycle pavement symbols sign with additional
plates as shown in Figure 10-15. The message on the lower
plate should normally read either Bicycle Lockers, Parking
Enclosure, Parking Rails or Parking. However, another
message may be required if special circumstances exist.
It is suggested that the bicycle rails shown in Figure 10-8

and Figure 10-10 should have a small painted bicycle
'doolkill pavement symbol (Figure 10-16) painted on the pavement
beneath them so that the purpose of the rails is clear. An
alternative is to stencil `Bicycle Parking' on the device.
Figure 10-16: Pavement Symbol (for use under parking rails

and at other bicycle parking facilities)
Figure 10-17: Single Rail Outside Shop

143
1 00- 1
A.1 General A.3 General requirements

In accordance with AUSTROADS `Road Safety Audit'
(Roads and Paths)
guide, it is appropriate that audits of bicycle routes and Are the designated crossing points and routes appropri-
other facilities are conducted at various stages from plan- ate and acceptable for cyclists given the desire lines?
ning through to construction, and in relation to existing
infrastructure. Are the characteristic bicycle use patterns accommo-
dated (i.e. categories of cyclists, volumes, times of
The lists of items in the sections below represents the pos- travel)?
sible contents of a checklist to assist the identification of
relevant safety issues or concerns associated with bicycle Do the proposals account for surrounding bicycle net-
facilities. It is unlikely that it includes all of the issues that work deficiencies and opportunities?
are of relevance or concern to cyclists, particularly given

Do consistent and suitable provisions exist for the
the wide variation in construction and design practice, and
respective categories of cyclists anticipated along the
the conditions that exist.
route, or can they be achieved; for instance, is a path
It is therefore essential that personnel conducting audits of required for child and inexperienced cyclists (sect.
bicycle facilities are experienced in and knowledgeable on 2.3/2.4.1.1)?
the provision of bicycle facilities.
Are grade separated or controlled crossings required?
Individual items provided in the lists may be applicable
Are traffic calming or local area traffic management
during several audit stages or may only relate to existing
measures required?
infrastructure.
Are the requirements of local codes of practice met?
Where existing infrastructure is to be audited, it is important
that to some degree these are performed on a bicycle and on
foot. The type of bicycle used should be representative of A.3.1 Alignment and Cross Section
the most common type in the region of the audit, but should Does the cross-section of the lane/path facility safely
not have a suspension system or tyres thicker than 32 mm. accommodate the anticipated cyclists (sect. 6.3.4)?
Similarly, it is important that safety audit personnel ride at Are stopping sight distances adequate for all traffic,
speeds typical of most users - which may be in excess of accounting for paths, roads, driveways, railways etc.?
25 km/h. Riding at slower speeds may not reveal potential
problems such as geometric limitations or pavement sur- Are sight lines applicable to the operation of cyclists
face defects. obscured by obstacles such as signs, trees, pedestrian
fences and parked cars?
A.2 Appendix Structure Is the horizontal and vertical alignment suitable? If
Section A.3 is generally applicable to roads, paths & inter- not, are warning signs installed?
sections. The requirements that relate mainly to either to Are there any sections of riding surface which may
paths or roads are provided in Section A.4 and Section A.5 cause confusion for users, e.g.:
respectively.
a) Is alignment of the riding surface clearly defined, par-
In so far as roads are concerned, it is assumed that gener- ticularly at unexpected bends or for dark conditions?
al road safety auditing processes exist, and hence the lists
below represent additional considerations for bicycles. b) Have disused pavement sections been removed or
treated?
c) Is sufficient route information or guidance provided?

144 BICYCLES
Does the design avoid or minimise the need for cyclists Are smooth and flat gutters/channels provided at
to slow or stop (sect. 3.4)? stormwater drainage pit inlets?
Do hazardous conditions (e.g. concealed intersecting Is the riding surface free of loose materials (e.g. sand,
paths, curves) exist at the bottom of steep gradients? gravel, broken glass, concrete spills)?
Is there suitable protection to prevent sand or other

A.3.2 Signs, Delineation and Lighting
debris from depositing on the riding surface?
Are all necessary pavement markings provided?
Does the riding surface have adequate skid resistance,
Are there any redundant pavement markings? Have particularly at curves, intersections, bridge expansion
redundant pavement markings been properly removed? joints and railway crossings?
Are all necessary regulatory, warning and direction Is the riding surface generally free of areas where
signs provided and located appropriately? Are they ponding or flow of water may occur?
conspicuous and clear in their intent? Are they at a safe Is special protection required to prevent cyclists from
distance/height with respect to the riding surface? running off the riding surface (sect. 7.6.2)?
Are signs in good condition and of an appropriate
standard? A.3.4 Vegetation, Maintenance and Construction
Are there any redundant signs? Is suitable access for cycling available during mainte-
nance and construction activities? (refer Appendix B)

Are fixed objects close to or on the path (trees, fences,
holding rails, etc.) treated to ensure visibility at night
Are all locations free of construction or maintenance
(e.g. painted white and fitted with reflectors or reflec-
equipment?
tive tape)? In the absence of an appropriate and regular mainte-
nance program:
Are pavement markings clearly visible and effective
for all likely conditions (e.g. day, night, rain, fog, a) Is there a possibility of the ingress of grasses into
rising or setting sun, oncoming headlights, light bituminous riding surfaces (e.g. Kikuyu) or similar
coloured pavement surface, poor lighting)? circumstances that could result in poor edge condi-
tions or pavement degradation?
Are user movements obvious or delineated through
intersections? b) Do thorn bearing grasses (e.g. Caltrop) exist, or are
they likely to be introduced adjacent to the riding
Is public lighting of facilities required? Is the lighting
surface?
design satisfactory, particularly at tunnels, underpasses
and areas of high pedestrian activity? Is it operating c) Are channels, kerb slots or similar treatments over
satisfactorily? which cyclists ride, located under deciduous trees
etc., or otherwise likely to experience a build up of
Are raised pavement markers recessed flushed with debris due to poor drainage conditions?
surface or located outside of the paths of travel of
cyclists, or outside of bicycle lanes? Will crack sealing processes or the application of spray
seals result in the presence of loose/granular materi-
Are thermoplastic markings chamfered? al/sand on the riding surface?
A.3.3 Riding Surface Does landscaping allow adequate clearances, sight dis-
tance etc, and will these be maintained given mature
Is riding surface suitable for cycling? plant growth (also see sect. 3.2)?
Is the riding surface and edges, smooth and free of Could personal security of path users be adversely
defects (e.g. grooves, ruts or steps) which could affect affected due to the position of bushes and other land-
the stability of cyclists or cause wheel damage (sect. scape features?
8.5.1)?
Is landscaping required as a wind break?
Is the pavement design/construction of a satisfactory
standard (sect. 8.5.2)? Will the positioning of trees and the species used con-
tribute to the degradation of the pavement (e.g. through
Can utility service covers, grates, drainage pits etc., be undermining or moisture variation)?
safely negotiated by cyclists (sect. 8.2)?
APPENDIX A 145
A.3.5 Traffic Signals Are there any potential problems of conflict between
the various path users (e.g. pedestrians and cyclists)?
Are separate pedestrian and/or bicycle phases provid-
ed where necessary? Is path subject to flooding? If so, are warning signs
provided and located appropriately (sect. 6.3.8)?
Do traffic signals operate correctly? Are signal dis-
plays located appropriately for all users? A.4.2 Alignment and Cross-Section
Does the design of the signals prevent conflicting Where paths are located adjacent roads, is there suffi-
motor vehicle movements during crossing phases for cient separation and/or protection from the carriage-
pedestrians and cyclists? way (sect. 6.5.2)?
Where a permanent demand for individual phases does Are adequate overtaking opportunities provided?
not exist, have suitable detection facilities been pro-
vided for cyclists? Are these operating satisfactorily Is the path width, at structures or otherwise, adequate
(sect. 5.4.1)? for the likely usage levels of pedestrians and cyclists
(sect. 6.6/7.4)?
Are inductive detector loops provided for bicycle
users, are they located appropriately, of a suitable Is the geometric alignment and gradient satisfactory
design and do they operate correctly for bicycles in the (sect. 6.3)?
various stopping positions (sect. 5.4.1)?
Is the design speed appropriate (sect. 6.3.1)?
If push-button actuators have been provided, are they
located to allow convenient and legal operation from Is path crossfall suitable for the anticipated path users
the normal stopping position (e.g. on left of riding sur- (sect. 6.3.8)?
face or kerb ramp, behind stop line)? Do they operate
correctly (sect. 5.4.1(c))? A.4.3 Intersections
Are phasing and phase times acceptable? Are suitable If justified, is path priority assigned to path users at
warning signs or guidance for cyclists erected where road crossings (sect. 6.7.2.1)?
intersection crossing times are insufficient (sect.
At intersections with busy roads, are appropriate facili-
5.4.3)?
ties provided, e.g. traffic signals, underpass, overpass or
median refuge, to allow path users to safely cross (sect.
A.3.6 Physical Objects 6.7.2.3)? Are the intersection controls satisfactory?
Are fences, guard rail or other objects located adjacent Is the location of road/path or path/path intersections
to the path(s) of cyclists free of sharp edges, exposed satisfactory and obvious with respect to horizontal and
elements or corners to minimise the risk of injury in vertical alignment?
the event of being struck by a cyclist (sect. 7.6.2)?
Is the presence of intersections obvious to road/path
If there are any obstructions located adjacent to the users?
paths of cyclists, are they adequately delineated (sect.
6.3.5/7.6.2)? Is a refuge required at road crossings? Would it
adversely affect (e.g. squeeze) cyclists travelling along
Are clearances to the operating space of cyclists the road?
acceptable (sect. 3.2/6.3.5/7.6.2)?
In relation to path entry controls:
A.4 Paths a) Are `terminal' devices required? If so, does the

device design meet the requirements listed in sect.
This section should be read in conjunction with Section A.3. 6.7.3.1(b).
A.4.1 General b) If central holding rails or bollards exist, is there a

legitimate reason why they are needed, and if so is
Are automatic reticulation systems timed to avoid peri- there sufficient pavement width either side (sect.
ods of significant path use? Do sprinklers spray away 6.7.3.1(e))?
from path (rather than across it)?
Are kerb ramps adequate and suitable for all users
Do irrigation hoses need to be placed across path sur- (width, slope, flush surface)? Are turning radii ade-
faces? quate (sect. 6.7.3.3)?
Are provisions for car parking in the vicinity of the

path satisfactory in relation to the operation and safety
of path users?
146 BICYCLES
Are holding rails provided? Are they positioned so as Are Local Area Traffic Management treatments appro-
to not unduly interfere with access for cyclists and priate for bicycles (sect. 4.7)?
other users (consider tandem bicycles, bicycles with
trailers etc. - sect. 6.7.3.2)? Do drainage pits require treatment because road sur-
facing has been deferred (sect. 8.2)?
Are the controls associated with path/path intersec-
tions satisfactory (sect. 6.8)? Is the positioning of bicycle pavement symbols poten-
tially hazardous to motor-cyclists?
A.5 Roads Are sealed shoulders at least as smooth as traffic lanes?
This section should be read in conjunction with Section A.3.
A.5.2 Intersections
A.5.1 General Are the intersection treatments appropriate (sect. 5)?
Are bicycle lanes required (sect. 2.4.1.2/4.3.1) Are there any common cyclist movements (legal or
otherwise) that differ from typical traffic movements?
Are bicycle lane or the left traffic lane widths adequate
Are these likely to be anticipated by other traffic? Can
to accommodate cyclists (sect. 4.4)? Can sufficient
these movements be made safely and if not what reme-
space be obtained (sect. 4.3.2)? Are there any squeeze
dial measures are required (sect. 5.2)?
points for cyclists?
Are `head start' storage areas required due to conflict-
Does the construction of the lane facility conform to
ing manoeuvres of bicycles and other traffic, or due to

this guide and other relevant standards?
high cyclist volumes (sect. 5.4.2.3)?
Are special provisions required along curving roads
(sect. 4.5.1)?
Are special provisions for cyclists required at round-
abouts (sect. 5.5.2)?
Are road markings for cyclists suitable and adequate,
and do they meet relevant standards?
Are there continuity lines marked where appropriate
(e.g. sect. 5.3.1)?
On controlled access roads, is a commuter path
required within the reservation?
147
. .. -.
The signing and delineation of construction and mainte- With reference to Figure B-1, where adequate provision
nance works on roads and footpaths should be performed for cyclists is not possible on a road, access along a path
in accordance with Australian Standard AS 1742.3 and in the area of the roadside verge may be appropriate.
any relevant local codes of practice and regulations. In Provided adequate separation from the work area can be
general, provision for works on paths should be made in maintained, it is generally acceptable to initiate and termi-
accordance with the principles of these standards. nate the roadside verge bicycle access within the road lane
Additional consideration of cyclists should be made in transition zones either side of the work area.
accordance with the details set out below.
For paths, reference should be made to Section 6.6 (in
Section 8 highlights a range of issues that are important to relation to paths located away from road reserves) and to
cyclists in relation to construction and maintenance works. 6.6.2 (separated paths) where temporary roadside verge
As a principle objective of provision for cyclists adjacent access is required. The controls highlighted in these sec-
to the works site, the riding surface should be maintained tions are applicable to temporary paths.
in a clean and smooth state. This may necessitate sweep-
ing of the riding surface on at least a daily basis. Containment fences should be provided in accordance
with the requirements of AS 1742.3, and otherwise as
Figures B-1, B-2 and B-3 highlight the desired level of required by Section 7.6.2. These may be appropriate to
provision required in the vicinity of works, depending on separate pedestrians and cyclists where a footpath is to be
the circumstances. The actual provisions to be made are used for access by cyclists, and where:
dependent on the conditions that exist, including:
significant pedestrian or bicycle volumes exist; or
presence of a traffic controller;
safety issues may arise due to the unexpected use of a
existing level of bicycle use, and also of pedestrian use footpath by cyclists.
in the case of shared use path diversions;
Examples of provisions for paths located adjacent roads
available opportunities to provide for cyclists; and in reserves are shown in Figures B-2 and B-3
road or path alignment; respectively.
traffic speeds and volumes; Temporary paths should be sealed. Whilst dependent on
circumstances, such as bicycle volumes, safety and the
duration of work; extent of inconvenience to cyclists, this may be unneces-
sary where:
surface material and condition; and
environmental impacts. the works are carried out over a short period (e.g. less
than 2 or 3 weeks duration);
Provision for cyclists on roads should be made in the fol-
lowing circumstances: temporary path surface is firm, smooth and free of
thorns;
where bicycle lanes exist;
the works are carried out during dry weather condi-
arterial roads; tions; and
collector roads, with an AADT in excess of 3000 vehi- path traffic is minimal.
cles per day; or
However, it is very desirable that temporary paths are
strategic and other significant bicycle routes. sealed and delineated where works are carried out over
longer periods. Separated paths should be suitably delin-
Safety Barriers should be provided where required by AS eated regardless of the period of construction.
1742.3, and are generally appropriate where cyclists or
pedestrians are detoured onto roads. Temporary (lower) Where works on paths are carried out for a period exceed-
speed limits may also be appropriate in this circumstance. ing one day, the works should be made sufficiently visible
148 BICYCLES
Refer sect n 6.6.3 Temporary pat

for width on road provis
Gyrists' route
Works Site
Refer AS 174E3 for

signing and delineation provision Lane width to satisfy
requirements for Wide Kerbs" Lanes (sect 4.4.7)
0 ?0. Alternatively path ac s rovision is required.
C86 0 o o
C'} 60
Figure B-1: Works on Roads - Exclusive Bicycle Path Diversion
CYCUSTS+j *CYCLISTSSj
I PEAESTRIANS*j * PED RIANS)
Works Site
Figure B-2: Works on Paths adjacent Roads - Shared Use Path Diversion
CYCu
4 PEDESTRIANS j
Path geometry to be suit- Temporary path

abie for coasts' speeds Lane marking for longer duration works
Figure B-3: Works on Paths - Shared Use Path Diversion

APPENDIX B 149
for night time path travel, so that path users are able to
observe conditions under low ambient light conditions
including temporary access paths, and take appropriate
action. In addition, as a general principle, lighting on tem-
porary access paths should not be less than the existing
level on the original path.
Specific consideration may need to be given to the inter-

sections of paths and roads. The measures taken to pro-
tect traffic should be balanced with consideration to all of
the potential users and movements at such locations.
Where containment fences are used, to avoid catching the

pedals of cyclists the fence should be set back from paths
used by cyclists by at least 0.3m. In the case of mesh fenc-
ing particular care is needed to ensure it remains tightly
stretched and that it is supported regularly along its length.
Surface tolerances for bicycle riding surfaces are provid-

ed in Section 8.5.1. Where steel road plates are used to
cover excavated or damaged pavement surfaces, appropri-
ate steps should be taken to ensure that any steps and
grooves are within the tolerances of Table 8-1.

150
Appendix C
Human Powered Vehicles
Although the bicycle is the standard vehicle for the design The following vehicle dimensions may be helpful as a
of facilities, the use of tandem bicycles, tricycles and other guide:
`pedal powered vehicles' may be popular in some areas
and an allowance for these vehicles may be appropriate in
the design of some facilities (see sect. 3.2).
Recumbent Touring
There is limited information available on the needs, and
operating characteristics of these vehicles, and in particular
on their performance from the perspective of road and path
design, or in relation to traffic management and safety.
Therefore designers should make their own assessment of

the required measures that need to be taken, accounting

for the local use of these vehicles. (metres)
The following aspects may be relevant:

Vehicle i 0.9 1.0 0.56 0.82 0.56 0.56
Sight Distance Consider low cyclist eye height (as low

as 0.7 m ve riding surface in some 1.4 3.1 0.7 0.9 1.7
instances). Radius*
Braking Cuter
performance Turning
Path
4.1 2.55 1.85 1.6 2.55
Radius*
a stanwu btcycw t onversely,
bicycles may have a lesser 1.95 3.5 2.45 2.67 2.8 1.7
performance, Length
Additional length of some HPV's may *Based on smallest possible turning path at a stable speed. Radius
itate s ial consideration. measured either to the shoulder of a cyclist or to a bicycle element.
Turning Paths Refer Table C-2 Table C-2: HPV Dimensions
(ofroad Use vehicle design envelope equal to

difference in inner and outer turning
path radii, plus 0.3 m (0.4 m for
tandem). If ter than bicycle design
envelope width thm increase path or
road treatments accordingly.
Path Terminals Give due allowance. for ksser turning

capabilities and in particular avoid
chicanes.
Speed May be lower for elderly cyclists, or

cyclists with a disability.
Path gradients may have to be flatter
for elderly cyclists, or cyclists with a
disaNlity.
Education Make available relevant advice e.g.
conspicuity for low vehicles.
Table C-1: Human Powered Vehicle (HPV) -

Facility Design Considerations Figure C-1: Recumbent Tricycles
Ii
_
Figure C-2: Tandem Bicycle

I
I
APPENDIX C
Figure C-3: Bicycle with Hitch-bike

151
152 BICYCLES
Allott & Lomax, (1993), Cyclists and Roundabouts, A Bovy P. H. L. and Bradley M. A. (1985), Route Choice
Review of Literature. 2nd Edition. Report for the Cyclist's Analysed with Stated Preference Approaches. Transport
Touring Club, UK Research Record 1037.
Andrew O'Brien & Assoc. (1996), Review of Guide to Brude & Larsson (1997), The Safety of Cyclists at
Traffic Engineering Practice - Part 14 - Bicycles, State Roundabouts - a comparison between Swedish, Danish
Bicycle Committee, Vic and Dutch Results, Swedish National Road and Transport
Research Institute (VTI)
AUSBIKE 92, Proceedings of a National Bicycle
Conference, Melbourne, Australia, March 1992. Californian Department of Transportation (1995),
Californian Highway Design Manual: Chapter 1000
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1991), Census of Bikeway Planning and Design.
Population and Housing, Basic Community Profiles (by
State and Nationally) Cement & Concrete Association (C&CAA, 1996), Rider
Comfortable Concrete Dual Use Pathways - A Practical
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1988), Bicycle Usage and Guide for the Construction Supervisor.
Safety, New South Wales.
Cement & Concrete Association (C&CAA, 1998),

Australian Bureau of Statistics (1991), Bicycles - Urban, Concrete Roads Manual (Draft Chapter 9: Cycleways and
Northern Territory. Golf Buggy Paths)
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1991), Australian Model Centre for Research and Contract Standardisation in Civil
Code for Residential Development (Nov. 1990) Australian and Traffic Engineering (1994), Record 10 Sign Up for the
Government Publishing Service, pp 71 - 74. Bike, Netherlands (CROW 10)
AASHTO (1991), Guide for the Development of Bicycle Cross K. D. and Fisher G. A. (1977), Study of
Facilities. Published by the American Association of State Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Accidents, NHTSA, DOT-MS-4-
Highway and Transportation Officials. 00982.
AUSTROADS (1994), Road Safety Audit, AP-30/94, Crossing, (1987), The Child Cyclist, State Bicycle
AUSTROADS Sydney Committee of New South Wales, Traffic Authority of New
South Wales
AUSTROADS, (1996), Urban Speed Management in
Australia, API 18, AUSTROADS Sydney Dorrestyn & Co Pty Ltd, (1998), Means of Assisting
Bicyclists at Signalised Intersections, Transport SA
AUSTROADS (1999), Australia Cycling - The National
Strategy 1999 - 2004 Department of Transport (DOT, 1996), Further Development
of Advanced Stop Lines, Traffic Advisory Unit.
AUSTROADS, Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice
Parts 1 to 14, AUSTROADS Sydney. Geelong Bikeplan Committee (1984), Bicycle Planning in
Australia
Balsiger O. (1992), To Plan for Cycling is to Encourage it,
The Bicycle: Global Perspectives, Conference Velo Godefrooij, (1992), Criteria for Segregation and
Mondiale, Montreal, Velo Quebec Integration of Different Modes of Transport, The Bicycle:
Global Perspectives, Conference Velo Mondiale,
Bicycle Victoria (1996), It Can Be Done, A Bicycle Montreal, Velo Quebec
Network on Arterial Roads
Hoffman, Payne And Prescott (1978). Children's
Brude & Larsson (1997), The Safety of Cyclists at Estimates of Vehicle Approach Times. Session 7, Paper No
Roundabouts - a Comparison between Swedish, Danish 3, Joint Australian Road Research Board and Department
and Dutch results. Swedish National Road and Transport of Transport Pedestrian Conference, Sydney, 1978.
Research Institute
Hudson M (1982), Bicycle Planning: Policy and Practice.
Jorgensen N. O. (1990), Roundabouts - Flow improve- Architectural Press, London.
ment or Speed Reduction. PTRC Summer Meeting 1990.
Hughes, T (1998), Submission on Review of
BIKEWEST (1992), Guidelines for the Design of Bicycle AUSTROADS Part 14, Land Transport Safety Authority,
Facilities, Department of Transport, Western Australia. New Zealand
REFERENCES 153
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America RP-8 Robinson, D.L. (1998), Accidents at Roundabouts in
(1983), American National Standard Practice for Roadway New South Wales. Road and Transport Research, vol 7,
Lighting, pp 8 & 9. no. 1, 3-12
INSTAT (1988), Day-to-Day Travel in Australia 1985-86, Sandels S. (June 1974) The Skandia Report II, Why Are
Report No. CR69, Federal Office of Road Safety, Children Injured In Traffic? A Skandia publication,
February 1988. Sweden.
Insurance Council of Australia (1987), Bulletin July 1987,
Shepherd, R (1994), Road and Path Quality for Cyclists,
Stolen Push-bikes: Like trying to find a needle in a Proceedings of 17th ARRB Conference, Gold Coast, QLD
haystack.
STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA.
Jordan P. (1986), Pedestrians and Cyclists at Roundabouts,
(1986a), Australian Standard Manual of Uniform Traffic
Proceedings 3rd National Local Government Engineers Control Devices, AS 1742 Part 1: General Introduction
Conference.
and Index of Signs (1991) and Part 9: Bicycle Facilities
(1986). SAA, Sydney.
Layfield R. E. and Maycock G. (June 1986) Traffic
Engineering and Control, pp 343 - 349. STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA. (1990),
Australian Standard AS 1742.10, Manual of Uniform
Leschinski, R (1994), Bicycle Detection at Signalised Traffic Control Devices Part 10: Pedestrian Control &
Intersections, Australian Road Research Board Protection
Lines, CJ (1995, UK), Cycle Accidents at Signalised STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA. (1993),
Roundabouts. Traffic Engineering and Control, vol 36, no. Australian Standard AS 1428.1, Design for Access and
2,74-5,77 Mobility, Part 1 - General Requirements for Access -
Buildings
Loder & Bayly Pty Ltd (1989), Width of Kerbside Lanes
for Cyclists, Report prepared for the Bicycle Co- STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA.
ordination Unit of VicRoads. (1986b), Australian Standard 1158.0 - Public Lighting
Code Introduction, Sydney
McHenry & Wallace (1985), Evaluation of Wide Curb
STANDARDS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA. (1993),
Lanes as Shared Bicycle Facilities, Maryland Department
Australian Standard 2890.3 - Manual of Parking Facilities
of Transport
Part 3: Bicycle Parking Facilities, Sydney.
McLean, J (1997), Review of Accidents and Rural Cross State Bicycle Committee of Victoria (1987a), Survey of
Section Elements including Roadsides. ARRB Transport Cyclists Characteristics and Cycling Patterns, prepared for
Research, Research Report ARR 297. the Ministry of Transport by Spectrum Research.
Mathieson J.G. (1991), Bicyclist Trauma: Causes, Costs State Bicycle Committee of Victoria (1987b), Bicycle
and Countermeasures. Cyclists and Law Compliance Facilities, Planning and Design Guidelines, Victoria
Seminar, Geelong, Victoria, April 1991. Transport.
National Bicycle Strategy, Federal Department of Sustrans (1997), The National Cycle Network Guidelines
Transport and Communications, Land Transport Policy and Practical Details, Issue 2, Ove Arup & Partners
Division, 1993.
Van Minnen, J. (1992), Roundabouts - Safe For Cyclists
Oregon Department of Transportation (1992), Oregon Too?, SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, The
Bicycle Plan. Published by The Technical Services Netherlands. Still More Bikes Behind The Dykes pp 247 -
258.
Branch, Oregon Department of Transportation.
Van Minnen, J (1996), Safety of Bicycles on Roundabouts
Ove Arup and Partners (1989), Urban Freeway Cycling Deserves Special Attention. SWOV Institute for Road
Study. Produced for VicRoads and the Roads and Traffic Safety Research
Authority of New South Wales.
Velo Quebec (1992), Technical Handbook of Bikeway
Parker, A. (1992) , The Green City, How to Marry Design. Ministere des Transports du Quebec and the
Bicycles and Rail, Australian Cyclist, Volume 16, No 3, Canadian International Development Agency.
June - July 1992.
Vic Roads (1991), Victorian Bicycle Strategy.
Information Retrieval
AUSTROADS (1999), Guide to Traffic Eugmeenag Practice, Part 14 -

Bicydes,Sydney A4, 153pp AP-Il 14
Kfl WORDS.
Bicycle Itoad Usez ¶fltffic Lane Bicycle Path, Cycling, Multi Mode
Intersections, Faking Traffic Island
The AUSTROADS Oxide to Traffic Engmeenng Practice, provides a comprehen-

awe coverage of traffic analysis, design. traffic management and
road safety standards and practices in 15 parts of' the Guide have now
been published
Part 14 - a ofthe 1993 publication ft incorporates
the latest practice in the provision of road and path facilities for cyclists
Part 14 provides an overview ef planning for cyclists in relation to the different
levels of and includes thscussions on the role of cycling in transport
and integrated land useplanmug It details the technical requirements for designing
roads and paths for safe and efficient cycling Guidelines are provided on the
choice of bicycle facilities, the design of road and road/path intersections, traffic
control devices, pavement design provision It bicycles at and provi
stons associated with the construction and maintenance of roads and paths in rela-
tion to cycling Guidelines are also provided on the requirements for bicycle park-
ing and other end of facilities
AUSTROADS Publications
Austroads publishes a large number of guides and reports. Some of its more recent
publications are:
AP-1/89 Rural Road Design
AP-2/90 Design of Sprayed Seals
AP-8/87 Visual Assessment of Pavement Condition
AP- 12/91 Road Maintenance Practice
AP- 13/91 Bridge Management Practice
AP- 14/91 Guide to Bridge Construction Practice
AP- 15/96 Australian Bridge Design Code
AP- 17/92 Pavement Design
AP-18/96 RoadFacts 96
AP-22/95 Strategy for Pavement Research and Development
AP-23/94 Waterway Design, A Guide to the Hydraulic Design of Bridges, Culverts & Floodways
AP-30/94 Road Safety Audit
AP-36/95 Adaptions and Innovations in Road & Pavement Engineering
AP-40/95 Strategy for Ecological Sustainable Development
AP-41/96 Bitumen Sealing Safety Guide
AP-43/98 National Performance Indicators

AP-44/97 Asphalt Recycling Guide
AP-46/97 Strategy for Concrete Research and Development
AP-48/97 Australia at the Crossroads, Roads in the Community - A Summary
AP-49/97 Roads in the Community - Part 1: Are they doing their job?
AP-50/97 Roads in the Community - Part 2: Towards better practice
AP-51/98 Electronic Toll Collection Standards Study
AP-52/97 Strategy for Traffic Management Research and Development
AP-55/98 Principles for Strategic Planning
AP-56/98 Assessing Fitness to Drive
AP-57/98 Cities for Tomorrow - Better Practice Guide
AP-58/98 Cities for Tomorrow - Resource Document
AP-59/99 Cities for Tomorrow - CD-ROM
AP-60/99 Guide to Stabilisation in Roadworks
AP-61/99 Australia Cycling 1999-2004: The National Strategy

AP-11.1/88 Traffic Flow
AP- 11.2/88 Roadway Capacity
AP-11.3/88 Traffic Studies
AP- 11.4/88 Road Crashes
AP- 11.5/88 Intersections at Grade
AP- 11.6/93 Roundabouts
AP-11.7/88 Traffic Signals
AP-11.8/88 Traffic Control Devices
AP- 11.9/88 Arterial Road Traffic Management
AP-11.10/88 Local Area Traffic Management
AP-11.11/88 Parking
AP-11.12/88 Roadway Lighting
AP-11.13/95 Pedestrians
AP-11.14/99 Bicycles
AP-11.15/99 Motorcycles
These and other Austroads publications may be obtained from:

ARRB Transport Research Ltd Telephone: (03) 9881 1547 Web address: www.arrb.org.au
500 Burwood Highway Fax: (03) 9887 8144 Email: donm@arrb.org.au
VERMONT SOUTH VIC 3131 Australia
or from road authorities, or their agent in all States and Territories; Standards New Zealand & Standards
Australia.
ISBN 0 85588 438 X

AUSTROADS
Part 14-Bicycles
SAA HB69.14-99
AP-14-11/99

AP-11.14 99 Guide To Traffic Engineering Practice Part 14 - Bicycles

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AP-11.14 99 Guide To Traffic Engineering Practice Part 14 - Bicycles

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Licensed to Kayleen P Walsh on 02 Oct 2009. 1 user personal user licence only. Storage, distribution or use on network prohibited.

developing and promoting national practices

Roads and Traffic Authority, New South Wales

Austroads National Office

Second Edition 1999

Publication Review Committee

Consultant Technical Writer

Mr Kym Dorrestyn, Dorrestyn & Co Pty Ltd

COPYRIGHT © AUSTROADS 1999

Part 1 Traffic Flow

2. Planning for Cyclists ........................................................................................................ 2

2.8. Bicycle Planners ................................................................................................................. 13

3. Bicycle Rider Requirements ............................................................................................ 14

6.1. General .............................................................................................................................. 69

7. Provision at Structures ..................................................................................................... 107

8. Construction and Maintenance ....................................................................................... 116

8.6. Quality Systems .................................................................................................................. 121

9. Traffic Control Devices .................................................................................................... 122

10. End of Trip Facilities ........................................................................................................ 132

Appendix A: Example of Bicycle Safety Audit Checklist ........................................................... 143

Appendix B: Signing and Delineation of Works ......................................................................... 147

Appendix C: Human Powered Vehicles ...................................................................................... 150

References .............................................................................................................................. 152

Connectivity: Refer Section 3.5.

Cyclist: Rider of a bicycle or human powered vehicle.

Dual Use Path: Path now referred to as a Shared Use Path

Grade Separation: Physical (vertical) separation of opposing roads and/or paths.

Highway: A principal road in a road system.

Slow Point: An isolated narrowing of a carriageway introduced as a traffic calming measure.

It is important to understand that bicycle riders include

2 Planning for Cyclists

Australia Cycling is implemented and reviewed in a

makers and the Australian community; and

develop encouragement and other appropriate behav-

2.2.3. Local Strategic Bicycle Plans the State Road Authority;

Local Strategic Bicycle Plans can be developed on a the Police;

ational trips. Also included are new paths along major

designated local networks and routes designed to provide

the full construction of route sections between origins

Figure 2-2: Principal Bicycle Network

[3E3[3[3[3[31313131 3[313 Proposed Off Road Facility

Is the route a e Refer Path Treatment

Is route used for

Is route used for

Where route follows

limit greater than

Ensure satisfactory local

A detailed review should be

Bicycle lane or path treatments

Consideration should be given

Notes (Figure 2-4): (a) Education Programs

on-going media promotion of laws, responsible and

provision of information, maps and signs to guide

can go in 7 1/2 minutes from railway station.

- Boundary line of existing residential development in 1992.

Figure 2-5: Potential of Bicycle/Train Multi Mode Travel in Melbourne

questionnaires at schools, shopping centres, work places

Figure 2-6: Down Loading Data from a Bicycle Counter

3 Bicycle Rider Requirements

3.1. General 3.3. Smooth Surface

I - See Sectoo 6.*4.5 for es to tree cod other " s

Figure 3-1: Bicycle Operating Space

purpose of the route should be identified as well as the 3.6. Information