CYCLING IN

V1.0

THE CITY
A COMPENDIUM OF
INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE
 36-40 York Way
CYCLING IN THE CITY: London N1 9AB
A COMPENDIUM OF
INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE +44 (0)20 7843 3165
[email protected]
TEAM: www.urbanmovement.co.uk
URBAN MOVEMENT

EDITED BY:
CHRISTOPHER MARTIN

DATE:
MAY 2013
MAY 2013 contents

00 INTRODUCTION 4

LINKS
01 OVERVIEW OF OPTIONS/PRINCIPLES 8
02 CYCLING IN THE CARRIAGEWAY 10
03 SHARED USE FOOT/CYCLE PATHS 11
04 IN-CARRIAGEWAY CYCLE LANES 12
05 SEPARATION: PRINCIPLES + DIMENSIONS 14
06 SEPARATION: DESIGN OPTIONS 20
CASE STUDY - SEGREGATION: ROYAL COLLEGE STREET 22
CASE STUDY - CYCLING SUCCESS: SEVILLE 24
CASE STUDY - COPENHAGEN: WALKING, CYCLING + FUN 26
07 CONTRA-FLOW FACILITIES 30

JUNCTIONS
08 JUNCTIONS: GENERAL 34
09 SIGNALISED JUNCTIONS 38
10 ROUNDABOUTS 44

SPECIALS
11 BUS STOPS 52
CASE STUDY - BIKE TRACKS + BUS STOPS 54
12 CAR PARKING 56
13 FILTERED PERMEABILITY 58
14 ACCESSORIES 60
00 INTRODUCTION

This document aims simply to collect We have tried hard to ensure that we
in one place a range of urban cycle are not treading on any toes as regards
design guidance, for features great intellectual property. Other than a few
and small, from different countries. points where we’ve added our own take
We looked up what Compendium on a topic, everything in this document
means, and we’ve tried to adhere to is freely available online. We claim no
the following definition: “A concise, credit for it, and want only to point you
yet comprehensive, compilation of a in its direction. (If you think we may
body of knowledge.” What we wanted have over-stepped the mark here, or
to do was to help provide a reference have failed to give credit where it’s due,
resource for fellow practitioners and please do let us know.)
others involved in making streets more
attractive to cycle along. It’s our intention to update this
document from time to time, so we’d
You may notice that we’ve only be very happy to receive suggestions
described the contents as about additional material the
International Practice, and have compendium could contain (to make
consciously omitted any reference to it more comprehensive) or stuff you
‘best’, or even ‘good’. We have, we think is best left out (to help make it
trust, excluded any downright ‘bad more concise). Any other feedback or
practice’, but our purpose is to let queries would also be welcome.
you see what others say, not pass
judgement on it. Thank you.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 4

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 5
LINKS
01 OVERVIEW OF OPTIONS/PRINCIPLES

THE CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK USES THIS DIAGRAM THE LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARDS USES THIS
TO GUIDE CHOICES OVER THE FORM OF PROVISION: DIAGRAM FOR THE SAME PURPOSE:

LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARDS

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 8

THE IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY PROVIDE THOUGH SOMEWHAT LONG IN THE TOOTH (& SOME
THESE OBJECTIVES FOR CYCLE LINKS: WOULD SAY OUT-DATED), THE UK DEPARTMENT FOR
TRANSPORT’S LOCAL TRANSPORT NOTE 2/08 ON ‘CYCLE
Links are the physical cycling infrastructure that join origins INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN’ REMAINS AN IMPORTANT
to destinations. They can take a variety of forms depending REFERENCE DOCUMENT:
on particular conditions. We recommend providing for
cyclists in a manner that supports and promotes a more
sustainable approach to travel.

The key objectives include:

Local Transport Note 2/08
- Providing for two abreast where possible – this makes
cycling more enjoyable, but the wider cycle facility also October 2008
makes it safer, more visible and more attractive.

- Providing consistently for cyclists – minimising the need

to make transitions from one type of link to another, and
Cycle Infrastructure
making the overall facility predictable and legible; wider Design
cycle facility also makes it safer, more visible and more
attractive.

- Designing junctions where cyclists are safely integrated

with the main traffic flow – ensuring better bicycle provision
and reducing bicycle / pedestrian conflicts.

It is not acceptable to simply provide whatever space is

left over after traffic has been catered for – this approach
often results in facilities that are substandard and unsafe
for cyclists. Substandard facilities have been shown to be
dangerous, increasing the likelihood and severity of conflict.
It would be better not to provide any cycling facility at all, and
to review the overall cycle network.

Solutions may include reducing the number of traffic lanes,

reducing the design speed of adjoining traffic, or introducing
a segregated or off-road cycle facility.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 9

02 CYCLING IN THE CARRIAGEWAY

IN MANY LIGHTLY-TRAFFICKED, RELATIVELY NARROW OF SUBJECTIVE SAFETY IS LOWER, PEOPLE MAY BE

STREETS, LIKE RESIDENTIAL STREETS USED ONLY OR DETERRED FROM CYCLING.
PREDOMINANTLY FOR LOCAL ACCESS, CYCLING IN THE
CARRIAGEWAY WILL BE THE ONLY PRACTICABLE OPTION. IN THE UK, THE CONCEPTS OF ‘VEHICULAR CYCLING’
WHERE VEHICLE FLOWS ARE BOTH LOW AND SLOW, AND THE ‘PRIMARY POSITION’ WERE PROPOUNDED TO
SUBJECTIVE SAFETY IS LIKELY NOT TO BE A DETERRENT DESCRIBE HOW CYCLISTS SHOULD BOLDLY ‘TAKE THE
TO CYCLING. NO SPECIAL FACILITIES, OTHER THAN ROAD’ AND ACT LIKE DRIVERS OF MOTOR VEHICLES.
POSSIBLY CYCLE SYMBOLS TO INDICATE THE LIKELY
PRESENCE OF CYCLISTS IN THE CARRIAGEWAY, WILL WHILE THE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT SUCH CONCEPTS
USUALLY BE NECESSARY. HAVE NOT BEEN FOUND ATTRACTIVE BY THE VAST
MAJORITY OF THE NON-CYCLING PUBLIC, IT IS WORTH
HOWEVER, WHERE CYCLISTS ARE REQUIRED TO USE THE BEING FAMILIAR WITH THEM. TRY SEARCHING
CARRIAGEWAY IN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THE LEVEL WIKIPEDIA FOR ‘VEHICULAR CYCLING’

THE IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY PROVIDE

THESE RULES FOR WHEN CYCLING IS INTENDED TO TAKE
PLACE IN THE CARRIAGEWAY:
Where such streets are less than 5.5m in width, there should
Mixed or shared streets are suitable in low traffic single be no central lane marking, thereby ensuring all road users
lane environments where cyclists and pedestrians take in either direction yield to each other.
precedence over vehicular traffic. The key feature from a For widths between 5.5 and 7.0m, a central lane
cycling perspective is that cyclists “take the lane” in line with marking should be provided to separate opposing
vehicles. traffic.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 10

03 SHARED USE FOOT/CYCLE PATHS

THE LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARDS HAS THIS

GUIDANCE ON WIDTHS OF SHARED PATHS:

The recommended width for a shared use path is 3.0m with

a minimum width of 2.0m, plus an additional 0.5m for each
side of the track that is bounded (e.g. by a wall, railings,
fence or hedge).

THE UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT LOCAL

TRANSPORT NOTE 1/12 ON ‘SHARED USE ROUTES FOR
PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS’ PROVIDES THE LATEST
OFFICIAL UK GUIDANCE FOR SUCH ROUTES.
Local Transport Note 1/12
September 2012

Shared Use Routes for

Pedestrians and Cyclists

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 11

04 IN-CARRIAGEWAY CYCLE LANES

THE CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK HAS THE LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARD’S WIDTH GUIDANCE
FOLLOWING RULES ON CYCLE LANE WIDTH:
•• Cycle lanes should be 1.5m wide including a 0.3m solid
white line, and repeater cycle symbols should be used
every 100m. Coloured surfaces is used in cycle lanes
>1.8m to avoid confusion with highways.
•• Cycle lanes running alongside parking should be 2-2.5m
wide to provide sufficient width for cyclists to comfortably
overtake vehicles with opening doors etc.

IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT

AUTHORITY’S
WIDTH CALCULATOR

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 12

HOW THE DUTCH DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF CYCLES IN the cyclists and vehicle operators. These lanes ensure the
best use of the entire width of the road by directing cars
THE CARRIAGEWAY IN THE CROW DESIGN GUIDE
down the center of the road and allowing lanes of bicycles
(Cited from http://wiki.coe.neu.edu/)
to pass on either side. When two cars traveling in opposing
Many two-way roads are too narrow to simultaneously allow directions meet, they yield to passing bicyclists and then
two lanes of traffic to travel and also allow two bicycles to utilise the shared bicycle lanes to perform their pass. In the
travel. The solution in the Netherlands has been to install Netherlands, roads with shared bicycle lanes are usually
shared bicycle lanes on these roads called advisory lanes. collector roads that collect the traffic from small local roads
Advisory lanes are created in areas where separate cycle and direct it to a main road. They normally do not have a
tracks cannot be made, whether from spatial or government centerline and mainly have low to moderate volume traffic
restrictions. The basic set up for advisory lanes is a road for traveling at speeds of 30 - 50 km/hr in urban areas and up
motorised vehicles sandwiched between two bicycle lanes to 60 km/hr in rural areas. These lanes make safe bike and
with dashed lines. Advisory lanes do not have any centerlines vehicle travel possible on narrow roads.
and therefore leaves passing and decision making up to

LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARD’S CYCLE LANE

WIDTH GUIDANCE

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 13

05 SEPARATION: PRINCIPLES + DIMENSIONS

THE ADVANTAGES + DISADVANTAGES OF CYCLE TRACKS CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK’S GUIDANCE ON CYCLE
FROM ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN TRACK SEGREGATION

Cycle tracks provide increased comfort and safety for cyclists •• Cycle tracks should be designed to have their own level
as well as providing greater clarity about the expected between the carriageway and footway. The minimum
behavior of cyclists, as well as other road users. Properly width for a one-way cycle track is 1.7m, but it is
designed cycle tracks eliminate conflicts between bicycles recommended to not go under 2m, and the preferred
and parked cars by placing the cycle track on the inside width is 2.2m.
of the parking lane. They also provide adequate space to •• At the beginning + end of a cycle track, a 15-20m long
remove the danger of “car dooring.” Danish research has solid white line should be painted on the highway. This
shown that cycle tracks can increase bicycle ridership 18 to line should maintain the width of the cycle track.
20 percent, compared with the five to seven percent increase
•• The kerb height between the cycle track and carriageway
found resulting from on carriageway bicycle lanes. The same
study also found that fewer cyclists were hit or run over from should be 7-12cm, and 5-9cm between the cycle track and
behind, were hit when turning left, or ran into a parked car. the footway.
On the other hand, there also a number of cycle track •• Two-way tracks can be introduced in some circumstances
design issues. As cyclists are not traveling directly alongside such as major roads with few junctions, or through
automobiles, motorists may not be aware of their presence, recreational areas. The track should be at least 2.5m
leading to increased vulnerability at intersections. In wide with a 1m verge separating it from the carriageway
addition, regular street sweeping trucks cannot maintain in urban areas, and a 1.5m wide verge on high
the cycle track; however, smaller street sweepers can ways.
accommodate the narrower roadway. Finally, conflicts
with pedestrians and boarding or alighting bus passengers
can occur, particularly on cycle tracks that are less well-
differentiated from the sidewalk, or that are between the
sidewalk and a transit stop.

CYCLE SEPARATION ON OLD SHOREHAM ROAD, BRIGHTON CYCLE SEPARATION AFTER A JUNCTION IN COPENHAGEN

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 14

STOCKHOLM DESIGN STANDARDS’ GENERAL CYCLE TRACK
PRINCIPLES

LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARDS’ CYCLE TRACK

WIDTH GUIDANCE

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 15

LESSONS ON THE DUTCH APPROACH TO CYCLING FROM
THE CROW DESIGN GUIDE
(Cited from http://wiki.coe.neu.edu/)

Dutch design for bicycle traffic is based on the idea that Cycle tracks should have a design speed of 30 km/h along
separation from cars keeps cyclists safer and gives them main cycle routes and 20 km/h for basic networks. The cycle
a low-stress, comfortable ride. The standard method of track should also be painted red or red asphault typical of
keeping bicycles separate from motor traffic is one way cycle other bicycle ways. The barrier provided between motor
tracks. traffic and the cycle track should be at least 0.35 meters and
where there are lamp posts it should be 1.00 meter.
A one way cycle track is a dedicated lane of travel, in one
direction only, for use by bicycles separated from motor (and In instances with narrow profiles, it is still possible to provide
sometimes pedestrian) traffic by a physical barrier. One way a physical barrier between cyclists and motor traffic. In such
cycle tracks can be distinguished by their red pavement with instances the guide provides 6 circumstances to separate
bicycle silhouettes. Unlike two way cycle tracks they do not cycle tracks and main carriageways. These are all variations
have the white dashed center line. Physical barriers used of small curbs. While they act as a physical barrier the small
include medians, curbs, parking lanes, and separation by curbs do not provide total protection, as motor vehicles can
elevation. According to the CROW Design Guide for Bicycle still cross the curb without too much trouble. Dimensions
Traffic cycle tracks are the safest solution for bicycle traffic of narrow one way cycle tracks must take into consideration
on 50 kmh roads, being preferred over cycle lanes. the height of the curb and the height of bicyclists pedals to
prevent cyclists from crashing near curbs.
CROW has recommendations for the widths of one way cycle
tracks based on rush hour intensity. For 0-150 bikes per hour
in one direction the recommended width is 2.00 meters, for
150-750 b/h 3.00 meters, and for more than 750 b/h 4.00
meters. While these are the ideal sizes, the guide recognizes
that the widths may not be able to be that large, and it may
be necessary to reduce track width by 0.5 meters, sacrificing
some comfort for feasibility. Most of the low traffic volume
cycle tracks have a width of 2.40 meters, which is the width
of eight 30 cm pavers.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 16

TYPES OF CYCLE TRACK

Street level with ‘C’ curb

C curbs are curbs of various shapes, built of concrete, asphalt or rubber. C curbs are a good way to provide physical
separation from motor traffic in a narrow road section. C-curbs are more dangerous than raised medians because a small
curb can still be crossed by a motor vehicle, but they will provide enough separation that a cyclist and motorist driving close
to the barrier will not hit each other.

Separated from footway by kerb and/or parking

In some instances the Dutch will raise a cycle track to an intermediate level. In intermediate cycle tracks, the pedestrian walk
way will be elevated slightly above the cycle track. In the photo above there is a 2-3 cm curb between the two. The separation
between the roadway and cycle track is usually a curb with a buffer. Intermediate level cycle tracks are the most common type
in the Netherlands. They provide protection from motor vehicles as well as keep pedestrians aware that there is a cycle track.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 17

NACTO DESIGN GUIDELINES ON CYCLE TRACKS

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 18

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 19
06 SEPARATION: DESIGN OPTIONS

By definition, cycle tracks are separated from other vehicular DIFFERENT TYPES OF SEGREGATION
lanes and pedestrians by a physical barrier, such as on-
street parking or a curb, or are grade-separated. Shy- Increasingly we are seeing a ‘paint + planters’ approach to
distances (Space left between vehicles or pedestrians as cycle track design, also known as ‘Soft or Light segregation’.
they pass each other) increase the perception of separation This is due to the fact that it can be essentially achieved
and of wider lanes by providing additional clear space overnight and it allows people to test schemes for relatively
through pavement markings or low barriers. Cycle tracks small amounts of money, schemes that if successful can
using a barrier separation can be at-grade, or either above be ‘sealed’ with more permanent materials at a later date
or below the level of the travel lanes and cross-streets. when funds become available. Soft or Light segregation is
Visual and physical cues should be present that show where an effective means of increasing support for a scheme and
bicyclists and pedestrians should travel. This can be done altering peoples perceptions of change, plus it is cheap!
through grade separation, pavement coloration or surfacing.
Whatever form of separation is used, openings in the barrier
or curb are necessary for driveway and minor street access,
these points will become potential
conflict points between bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists.

Choices regarding cycle track width and type are dependent

on road safety and costs, as well as ease of passage,
perceived risk, comfort, and experience of the route. Types
of cycle track separation are shown in the photographs and
descriptions following.

(“Cycle Tracks: Lessons Learned” 2009 ALTA Planning + Design)

‘SOFT/LIGHT’ SEGREGATION IN PORTLAND, USA

Credit: Jonathan Maus

‘SOFT/LIGHT’ SEGREGATION IN SEVILLE ‘SOFT/LIGHT’ SEGREGATION IN VANCOUVER, CANADA

Credit: Ride Your City Credit: Dylan Passmore

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 20

‘SOFT/LIGHT’ SEGREGATION IN VANCOUVER, CANADA
Credit: Dylan Passmore

‘SOFT/LIGHT’ SEGREGATION IN OTTOWA, CANADA

Credit: Ottowa Citizen

‘HARD/FULL’ SEGREGATION IN COPENHAGEN, DENMARK ‘HARD/FULL’ SEGREGATION IN COPENHAGEN, DENMARK

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 21

 CASE STUDIES
CASE STUDY

SOFT SEGREGATION | ROYAL COLLEGE STREET, making it safer and easier to cross the street.
LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN The changes would also protect southbound cyclists and
make them more visible to drivers. Narrowing of the
Royal College Street (RCS) had a higher than average carriageway should encourage slower driving speeds in
number of accidents. There were 17 accidents on RCS these areas. Raised tables across all junctions will also
within a 3 year period up until February 2012, including 2 ensure that speeds are reduced particularly where turning
serious and 15 slight accidents. 15 of the accidents involved movements are possible. Camden Council
cyclists and 2 were pedestrians. The vast majority of the
accidents occurred at junctions with side roads and many
involve cyclists heading southbound colliding with vehicles
turning out of a side road. Evidence suggested that drivers
were not anticipating southbound cyclists as they turned
onto RCS.
The proposals are to move southbound cyclists to the
opposite side of RCS to significantly reduce accidents.
Speed surveys were undertaken along the street and the
average traffic speed was 29.8 mph which is well in excess
of the 20 mph speed limit. The proposals are to narrow the
carriageway with parking bays and the new southbound
cycle track, to help encourage slower driving speeds

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 22

HARD SEGREGATION | OLD SHOREHAM ROAD,
BRIGHTON + HOVE

The new facilities aimed at creating a more pleasant and

safe walking and cycling environment, encouraging young
people and adults to use the route to and from school, work
and leisure activities. As well as this the proposals want to
create more efficient and safe traffic light junctions with
pedestrian and cycle crossing points. Pedestrian priority
was emphasised with raised crossings at junctions helping
people with buggies, wheelchairs and scooters.
A wide, raised zebra crossing also reinforced this
pedestrian priority particularly for children on route to
school. The scheme also delivered accessible bus stops
and improved street lighting.

Brighton + Hove City Council

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 23

CASE STUDY

CYCLING SUCCESS | SEVILLE Sillero, who now works with the University of Sevilla as a
Taken from the ‘London Cycling Campaign’ website - lecturer and on their cycle promotion scheme, adds the
‘Cycling increased tenfold in Seville after construction of secret to the city’s success was its political backing:
miles of bike tracks’, written by Laura Laker
“Political will is essential. Sometimes politicians want to
check first if the idea works, for instance making one or
Any city serious about increasing cycling could do a lot two isolated bike paths before making a stronger decision.
worse than look to Seville as a role model. In six years, But isolated cycle paths are almost useless if they’re
this unlikely paragon of cycling has achieved what very few not connected, making a network from the beginning.
cities in the world can boast, increasing cycling tenfold. Therefore people don’t use them and the politician becomes
Since 2006 Seville has increased the number cycling disappointed.”
journeys daily from under 5000 to a whopping 72,000
per day, from a modal share of less than 0.5% to around MAKING CYCLISTS FEEL SAFE
7%. This happened largely due to a 80-mile Dutch-style
network of well-connected cycle tracks and a 2,500-bike He adds that a cycle route is only as safe as its most
hire scheme, all put in place by politicians determined dangerous part, and people will only use a route if it is safe
to encourage cycle journeys over motor traffic. Built from the beginning to the end of their journey. Cyclists now
on what the architect Jan Gehl might describe as “on a share road space with slow-moving traffic in the older parts
human scale”, Seville’s narrow streets, plazas and diverse of the city where streets are narrower, while the newer
architecture reflect its vibrant history bordering Europe parts of the city, with wider streets and faster-moving
and Africa. As a popular tourist destination, like many traffic, are given segregated cycle lanes, as in the Dutch
European cities, Seville’s ancient streets were designed model. Pedestrians have priority where cycle lanes cross
for horse and pedestrian traffic. With four rush hours per footways and cyclists have priority where cycle lanes cross
day, as workers returned home for siesta, it witnessed roadways.
a great deal of motor traffic and almost no cycling. Not
surprisingly, the city’s narrow streets suffered gridlock. Critics might sneer at the fact that many of the cycle tracks
are two-way, when one each side of a main road would be
But back in 2005 Jose Garcia Cebrian, head of urban optimum. Also some tracks are relatively narrow compared
planning and housing at Seville city council, believed that with the best in the Netherlands, but there’s no doubt
with the right infrastructure the bicycle could solve Seville’s among locals the new cycle network has benefited the city.
traffic congestion problems. Cebrian noted, however, that
for any scheme to be a success cycle lanes had to form a Jorge Sanchez was born in Seville and has also lived
joined-up network that people would really use. Cebrian in London and Madrid, and has witnessed the city’s
approached Manuel Calvo, an urban consultant and former transformation. He said:
biologist, to help design and rapidly implement such a
network, and moved responsibility for cycling from the “Seville is now a cleaner, greener place. Drivers in Seville
traffic department to town planning, giving the project were known for driving too fast, now the centre of town is
more clout. Calvo, under his consultancy Estudio MC, views less chaotic, also due to the gradual pedestrianisation of
the city as a living organism, and believes that cycle lanes streets. I used to cycle in London and have been cycling in
need to be where people will use them for entire journeys - Seville in the last four years; the cycle lanes always make it
ie, along existing routes, rather than where it’s convenient much easier to feel secure.”
for motor traffic. Seville’s cycling group A Contramano has
helped push the cycling agenda forward in the city since it It’s not just the cycle numbers that are demonstrating
started in 1987. Co-founder and former president, Ricardo a positive trend. The types of people who cycle are very
Marques Sillero, said: diverse. Sanchez says:

“We feel this was one of the keys for our success in Sevilla: “You can certainly see lots of younger and older people
the basic network (50 miles) was made in just one year, and cycling, which destroys the myth that cycling is ‘dangerous.’
the first extension (up to 80 miles) in the next three years.” Over the last few years it is obvious there is a gradual
increase in the number of people who cycle because they

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 24

feel safe from the traffic. My sister thought it was not
for her, but I encouraged her to get a bike and use the
infrastructure and these days she doesn’t take the car to
work anymore. People close to me say it is relaxing after a
long day at work, cheaper and makes them feel happier and
healthier. The day they don’t take the bike they are moody.”

The figures certainly stack up in terms of investment

return: the €32m cycle network carries 72,000 cyclists on
weekdays compared with the city’s underground system,
which cost €600 million and carries 40,000 people daily.

Meanwhile Seville’s cycle hire scheme, Sevici, has more

than 250 docking stations across the city, including the
suburbs, making it the fifth largest in Europe, for a city
of around a million people. The importance of political
leadership in boosting city cycling has been highlighted
recently by a change in leadership in Seville, less positive
towards cycle promotion. This has meant the closure of the
city cycling office, and the implementation of other policies
that encourage tourist cycling over the expansion of cycling
among city-dwellers. Not least (in some ways mirroring the
doubling in Barclays Cycle Hire access charges in London)
Seville’s cycle hire fares have risen by 21%, compared with
a 10% rise in other city transport fares.

Despite the significant successes since 2005, local cycling

campaigners are having to lobby as hard as ever to keep
Seville’s magnificent cycling revolution firmly on track.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 25

CASE STUDY

COPENHAGEN: WALKING, CYCLING + FUN

In April 2013, Urban Movement went on a two-day Staying on this boulevard afforded me time to watch
fact-finding Streettour to Copenhagen. As usual, we wanted how the street worked and how people behaved. The
to see how other people do stuff; and we were particularly carriageway is generally made up of one lane in each
keen to experience how the city has dealt with providing for direction with, as seems to be the case at junctions
cycling on complex urban streets. throughout the city, turn lanes separated from the straight
ahead lane. The cycle lane (one in each direction) was
Arriving at the airport, we headed straight to the Metro outside the carriageway and grade separated both from
that took us to the city centre in 15 minutes, something it and the adjacent footway. Cycleways and footways were
that is rather enviable (especially after it took me about an laid to granite (see pictures below). One instantly striking
hour and a half to get back home from Gatwick). Alighting element of the cycle lane was its width, about 3m, allowing
at Nørreport station, home of the new and fantastically enough space for cyclists to comfortably pass one another
popular Torvehallerne food market, we immediately or ride side-by-side chatting. The vertical separation from
encountered upheaval associated with the works to create the cycle track to the footway was small, approximately
a new Metro line. On taking to the streets and walking to 25mm and with a slightly bevelled edge, allowing cyclists
our hotel, I was quite pleased that (admittedly by complete to ‘bump up’ onto the footway should they need. The line
fluke) we had arranged to stay on what seemed to be one between the two was also marked very neatly by white dots
of the most recently improved streets in the city: Vester painted onto the stone, providing an additional element of
Voldgade. A wide street, it caters well for reasonably heavy visual separation. The vertical separation of cycleway and
use by pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles alike, as carriageway was more pronounced (around 50mm).
well as accommodating plenty of trees and cafe seating.
And all in granite that’s not just tough but also pleasing to
the eye.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 26

We walked everywhere on Day 1 and cycled all of Day 2. was fascinating. Sometimes the cycle track passes behind
Whichever mode we used ourselves, it was evident that the bus stop, but commonly buses simply pull over next
the city is much more of a pleasure to cycle around than to the cycle track and passengers simply board and alight
London because its cycle infrastructure is not just more by walking across the cycle track from/to the footway.
developed, but because it is consistent: wide cycle tracks Often, there are no zebra-style or any other markings
on both sides of the street, going with the direction of to encourage cyclists to give way; but they still do.
traffic and grade separated from both the carriageway and Consideration again.
the footway. Generally, cycling is treated like a separate
mode of transport, with established, standard terms of
negotiation with motor traffic. On the whole, cyclists don’t
have to mingle with vehicles if they do not wish. This stand-
ardisation is one of the greatest assets of the city, I think, as
cyclists never get the rug pulled from under their feet (so to
speak) when they turn around a corner and the cycle lane
they were on has not been continued, or simply stops on a
street as there was no width to fit it in after the carriageway
was kept at a consistent width. Cyclists know they will be
catered for and looked after on streets and designers know
that this provision is simply what must happen.

As well as the physical provision, another equally important

factor in the city’s cycling success that I observed is
people’s (drivers’, cyclists’, pedestrians’) manner: their
consideration, if you will. (This, I am sure, has taken a
good while to develop, and is ‘encouraged’ by law; but
this should only give us more impetus to get going sooner
in the UK.) What I mean by people’s consideration is that
all street users are constantly on the lookout for others.
Right-turning (left in the UK) drivers expect to have cyclists
coming up on their right hand side (where the latter are
going straight ahead or turning right), and they both look for
them and wait for them. They expect this, as cycle provision
and cyclists are on every busy street. This is not to say that
Danish drivers are better than ours; it’s simply to say that
expecting to see a cyclist ‘on the inside’, checking for them
and giving way to them is an engrained part of the Danish
driving culture (not an anomaly, as is the case for the most
part on UK streets at the moment). Having a standard
situation that drivers and cyclists encounter on the vast
majority of streets is easier and safer for everyone involved.

The same culture of ‘giving way to the more vulnerable

user’ also applies to cyclists. While pedestrians respect,
and generally stay out of, cycle lanes, there are situations
– such as at bus-stops and where footways may be
over-crowded – where pedestrians and cyclists find
themselves temporarily in the same space. From my
observations, cyclists are used to watching out for such
situations and yield to pedestrians if necessary. The
interaction of buses, cyclists and pedestrians at bus stops

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 27

CASE STUDY

Moving on from cycle infrastructure, another thing that people sit and chat, walk through and cycle through en
stuck in my mind throughout my stay in the city (which masse. This desire and ability to have a place for numerous
extended another two days beyond the ‘official’ UM tour) activities, in an open public space, is something that I would
was the inclusion of elements of recreation, spontaneity like to see more of in London; rather than having sports
and fun throughout the public realm. It is something that facilities fenced off and down quiet streets.
I’m never that aware of in London, although it may help
being a tourist in order to see these things. If we don’t do
them here it could be for many reasons: maybe because
(rightly or wrongly) designers are afraid of law suits if
someone hurts themselves; maybe the process would get
too tied up in ‘red tape’; or maybe the maintenance burden
is something authorities simply don’t want to take on.
Whatever the reason, I don’t see these elements much in
the UK, and I would really rather like to.

What I mean is things such as those pictured below.

We were all walking down by Nyhavn, the picture
postcard historic harbour area, and came across a run
of trampolines: just there in the public realm. They were
not fenced off and even on a rather wet and cold day there
were people playing on them, and thoroughly enjoying it.
As well as this, the recently implemented Superkilen public
realm scheme in the Nørrebro district has transformed
a rather busy but shabby and uninspiring space, into a
vibrant, fun and active (and colourful!) place that people use
and obviously enjoy. Skateboard areas, a mini velodrome,
basketball facilities, a boxing ring and outdoor gymnasium
equipment, are all dotted around a public space where

Credit: Bjarke Ingels Group

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 28

 Like many, I think Copenhagen is a good model for
progressing the state of cycling in London. The streets are
busy with vehicles as well as cyclists and pedestrians, as
indeed are ours. Cycle infrastructure is important to the
city and is a great asset to it; it’s not always pretty, but it’s
always there. While newly-improved streets, like Hans
Christian Andersens Boulevard, are extremely well detailed
and look great, so are many of London’s; but the latter
hasn’t had cycling so high up the list of ‘design drivers’ for
its streets.

The most important thing to take away from Copenhagen, in

my opinion, is the desirability of deciding on, rolling out, and
sticking to a consistent approach for cycling infrastructure
(which could happily be Copenhagen’s). This would enable
everyone – drivers, pedestrians and cyclists alike – to get
used to how it works, and get used to new ways of how
they interact with one another. This change would, ideally,
come hand-in-hand with legislative/regulatory change;
but I believe that, over time, we can reasonably hope it will
become more and more about “This is just what we do”,
rather than “If I don’t do this I’ll get a ticket”.

Having cycle infrastructure on the majority of London’s

streets will raise the profile of cycling and increase
the numbers of people who want to do it, something
that we sorely need. It will also lead to London drivers
autonomously looking when they want to turn left across
the cycle lane, knowing cyclists will be going straight on
and they will need to wait. It will lead to London cyclists
knowing that they need to give way to pedestrians at bus
stops and other situations of potential conflict.

Credit: Bjarke Ingels Group

I think London needs this. We have been governed for a
long time by old thinking that ‘the car is king’, even though
our rhetoric and guidance has been against this for a good
while now. I think if we develop our cycle infrastructure and
give people using our streets more protection, and a fairer
share of the street, then I think everyone (including drivers)
will benefit and become more considerate to the others on
the road. Call me a romantic, but I’m certain it will work. So
shall we give it a go?

CHRISTOPHER MARTIN | URBAN MOVEMENT

Credit: Bjarke Ingels Group

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 29

07 CONTRA-FLOW FACILITIES

BRUSSELS’ CONTRAFLOW STANDARDS IN DIFFERENT CARRIAGEWAY CONDITIONS

Brussels Contraflow Design Standards

<2.6m 2.6-3m 3-4.6m 4.6-5m >5m
No Contraflow Contraflow allowed. Contraflow Mandatory Contraflow Mandatory Contraflow Mandatory
No Parking No Parking No Parking Parking Possible Parking Possible

WHAT DO OTHERS SAY ABOUT CONTRA-FLOW CYCLING

FACILITIES?

CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK: CARDIFF CYCLE DESIGN GUIDANCE’S EXAMPLES OF

ENTRANCES TO CONTRA-FLOW STREETS:
•• Segregated cycle facilities are not essential in lightly-
trafficked streets.
•• If necessary, a cycle track should be 1.7m and a cycle
lane should be 1.5m wide. If there is parking, the cycle
facility should be 2m wide.

UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT CYCLE

INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN (LTN 2/08)
•• Where the 85th percentile is less than 25mph and traffic
flows are below 1,000 vehicles per day, or where the
street forms part of a 20mph zone, it may be possible to
dispense with any marked cycle lane.
NACTO DESIGN GUIDELINES

•• Contraflow lane markings should be extended across

junctions at the entry/exit to a Contra flow lane to raise
drivers’ awareness of Contra-flow cycles.
THE UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT TRAFFIC
ADVISORY LEAFLET (TAL) 6/98 HAD THE FOLLOWING TO
SAY:

•• If provided, Contraflow lanes should be at least 1.5m

wide, but 2m is preferred. Where no cycle lane is
provided, a short section (between 4-5m long) should be
considered at entry/exit points.

•• Segregation at entry/exit points should always be

provided if there is sufficient room to do so.
HOWEVER, UK RESTRICTIONS ON PROVIDING ‘TWO-WAY
CYCLING ON ONE-WAY STREETS’ HAVE BEEN RELAXED
FOLLOWING TRIALS AND RESEARCH BY TRANSPORT FOR
LONDON. PARAGRAPHS 5.27-5.29 OF ‘SIGNING THE WAY’
BY THE UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (OCT 2012)
REFERS TO SPECIFIC EXEMPTIONS TO ‘NO ENTRY’ SIGNS
(SEE OPPOSITE.)

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 30

EXAMPLES OF CYCLE CONTRAFLOW | IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

ONE-WAY EXEMPTION FOR CYCLISTS

CYCLE CONTRAFLOW | LIVERPOOL ‘NO-ENTRY EXCEPT CYCLES’ SIGNS PROMOTES CYCLING

STOP PRESS: AT THE LONDON CYCLING CAMPAIGN AWARDS ON 8TH MAY 2013, THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN AND
THE CITY OF LONDON WERE JOINT WINNERS OF THE ‘BEST BOROUGH PROJECT’ FOR THEIR IMPLEMENTATION OF SIMPLE
CYCLE CONTRAFLOW MEASURES.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 31

JUNCTIONS
08 JUNCTIONS: GENERAL

CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK CYCLING EMBASSY OF GB: DUTCH INFRASTRUCTURE

•• If a cycle lane continues up to a junction, a marked cycle While separated cycle tracks are acknowledged to be
crossing should be carried through that junction to safe along the run of the road, there are concerns that
increase visibility of cyclists. they increase the danger to cyclists at junctions due to
•• If possible, cyclists should be given their own traffic conflicts from turning cars, lack of visibility of cyclists, and
heads. However this is generally used when there is a increased vehicle speeds with bikes being separated out
pre-green phase for cyclists. of the way. The Dutch guidelines are designed to mitigate
•• Where cyclists are fast moving in advance of a junction, these problems as far as possible.
the cycle lane/track should be stopped between 20-30m Where the speed limit is less than 70km/h (45mph), as the
in advance of the junction. The left-turn lane should also cycle track approaches the junction it should move closer to
be 4m wide if there isn’t a marked cycle lane. the carriageway (< 0.35 metres) to improve the visibility of
•• Vehicle stop lines should be at least 5m back from a cyclists to drivers. If the speed is greater, the track should
junction to increase visibility of cycles. bend away from the road, to leave space for turning cars to
•• Cycle lanes can be continued through junctions to give way before crossing the track, and drivers should be
raise road users awareness of potential conflict. Cycle warned of the track through signs. Bus stops and parking
crossings can be marked in blue, white, or use a dashed should not be allowed within 5m of a junction, and stop
0.3m wide lane marking. All are marked by repeater cycle lines pulled back, while cyclists are allowed to wait as far
symbols. forward on the intersection as possible. Bike tracks can be
converted to bike lanes also about 5m before the junction
to increase visibility and should be coloured. These lane
markers can continue right through the junction and the
lane should be 2.5m wide. Sharper corners, rather than
sweeping bends mean cars slow down and cross a smaller
area of the junction when turning. Where bike paths have
right of way across side streets, the crossing should be on
a raised surface. This is particularly important where a
two-way bike lane crosses a road.

SIDE STREET ENTRY TREATMENT A CYCLE LANE IN DELFT

Credit: ‘wiki.coe.neu.edu’

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 34

UK JUNCTION INNOVATIONS ARE CURRENTLY BEING
INVESTIGATED BY TRANSPORT RESEARCH LABORATORY
FOR TRANSPORT FOR LONDON

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 35

NACTO DESIGN GUIDELINES TALK ABOUT OPTIONS FOR
JUNCTION DESIGN

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 36

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 37
09 SIGNALISED JUNCTIONS

The DUTCH CROW DESIGN MANUAL offers a ‘menu’ of TWO-STAGED TURNS

bike-friendly measures which can be used singly or in
combination. These include: ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN (in “Cycle Tracks: Lessons
•• Shortened cycle time Learned” 2009) highlight The ‘Copenhagen Left’ (also
known as the ‘Jug-Handle Turn’) is a way of enabling a safe
•• Include additional green light options for cyclists
left turn (or right turn in the UK) movement by cyclists in a
•• Permit right turn through red (for bicycles) – or even a
cycle track. Cyclists should not be allowed to make left-turn
‘slip road’ for cyclists allowing them to bypass the light movements from the cycle track and are often physically
altogether. barred from moving into the roadway by the cycle track
•• Give all cycling directions a green light at the same time barrier. Instead, cyclists approaching an intersection can
•• Accept motorised vehicle/bicycle sub-conflicts make a right into the intersecting street from the cycle
•• Set favourable waiting times for cyclists track, to position themselves in front of cars. Cyclists can
•• Set favourable phase sequence for cyclists turning left go straight across the road they were on during next signal
(allowing them to turn in a single cycle) phase. All movements in this process are guided by separate
traffic signals - motorists are not allowed to make right turns
•• Green wave for bicycle traffic so that cyclists travelling at
on red signals. In addition, motorists have an exclusive left-
12mph do not encounter red lights.
turn phase, in order to make their movements distinct from
•• Introduce advance detection/pre-request for cycle traffic the cyclists.
•• Introduce expanded cycle stacking lane for bikes slowing
down to turn right without delaying cyclists wishing to
cycle straight on
•• Increase flow capacity for motorised traffic
•• Set two-way green light

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 38

A ‘TWO STAGE LEFT’ IN TORVEGADE, COPENHAGEN

A DESIGN FOR A ‘TWO STAGE LEFT’ CURRENTLY PROPOSED FOR SOUTHAMPTON

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 39

A ‘TWO STAGE LEFT’ IN UTAH, USA
Credit: www.saltcycle.org

A ‘TWO STAGE LEFT’ IN NEW YORK CITY, USA A ‘TWO STAGE LEFT’ IN PORTLAND, USA
Credit: progressivetransit.wordpress.com Credit: http://hcrum.tumblr.com/

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 40

A ‘TWO STAGE LEFT’ IN COPENHAGEN

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 41

CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK’S ADVICE ON TAKING
CYCLE TRACKS THROUGH JUNCTIONS
•• Cycle tracks/lanes should be carried through T-junctions
when traffic from the adjoining road is relatively small in
volume.
•• When there are large volumes of traffic on the primary
road, the cycle track crossing the secondary road should
be offset by 5-7m away from the junction and should be
on a raised crossing.

STOCKHOLM DESIGN STANDARDS GUIDANCE ON

DETAILING JUNCTION MARKINGS

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 42

SIGNALISED JUNCTION | IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

EXAMPLE OF A ‘LATE-RELEASE’ SIGNALISED JUNCTION | IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 43

10 ROUNDABOUTS

CYCLING EMBASSY OF GB: DUTCH INFRASTRUCTURE CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK GUIDANCE ON

DESIGNING ROUNDABOUT
Large multi-lane roundabouts can be extremely daunting for
cyclists in the UK, with many opportunities for conflict with •• When there is more than one running-lane within
traffic, and requiring cyclists to be fast, alert and confident the roundabout itself or in the arms of the junction:
of their abilities to accelerate out of trouble. In contrast, the
cycle facilities should be placed at the perimeter of
recommended standard for Dutch roundabouts is for there
roundabouts.
to be a physically separated circular cycle track running
around the outside of the main carriageway (shown below in •• On lightly trafficked roads with a speed limit of between
the ‘bottom left scenario) . In urban areas, cars should give 30-50km/h cyclists should mix with vehicles. The
way to cyclists on the track (this is implemented in about roundabout should be traffic calmed, with a 10m diameter
60% of urban roundabouts); whereas in rural areas, bikes roundabout and no pedestrian islands on the arms.
generally give way to cars coming on and off the roundabout. •• Cycle tracks can be introduced on major roundabouts.
The track is separated from the rest of the roundabout by The roundabout itself should be between 15-30m in
about 5m, allowing space for a single car to stop without diameter, and the cycle track should be installed 5m from
blocking the passage of bikes. Clearly marked pedestrian
the ‘circulation’ area.
crossings usually run alongside the bike tracks, making both
•• In larger roundabouts where the diameter of the
more visible. These crossings should have traffic islands
to make crossing easier and should be raised about 12cm roundabout is between 20-30m, cycles should not mix
from the rest of the carriageway, starting 5m before the with traffic and a cycle track should be installed between
crossing itself, to make them more obvious to cars. Larger 5-7m from the ‘circulation’ area.
two lane roundabouts generally have two entry lanes per leg •• Cycles should mix with traffic in lightly-trafficked mini-
of the roundabout, but only a single exit lane increasing the roundabouts. Where traffic counts are between 6-8000
visibility of bikes and pedestrians using the crossings. Some vehicles per day, a cycle track should be installed 5m
roundabouts, known as ‘turbo roundabouts’ have spiral lane from the ‘circulation area’.
markings removing the necessity for cars to change lane as
they negotiate it – indeed, there are raised markers between
the lanes to prevent corner cutting – giving drivers fewer
distractions as they exit the roundabout. Most cycle tracks
are one-way, running in the same direction as the rest of the STOCKHOLM DESIGN STANDARDS
traffic on the roundabout, but some busy roundabouts have
two-way lanes which can increase conflicts and accidents.
On the whole, roundabouts have been found to be much safer
than four-way intersections, and separated tracks safer than
lanes on the roundabout itself; giving cyclists right of way
over drivers entering or exiting the roundabout does increase
the number of accidents slightly (amounting to 52-73 extra
hospital admissions a year). Shared space roundabouts, such
as the one in Drachten, also have a cycle track around the
outside, giving bikes right of way over drivers entering or
exiting. The main difference is that there is no marked lane
separating bikes from pedestrians, fewer warning signs, no
traffic islands, and the bike track is less clearly distinguished
from the carriageway, in line with the shared space principle Top left shows us a situation
of minimum regulation. Despite this, a study found that 95% with no formal provision for
of bikes using the roundabout were able to proceed without cyclists. Top right shows us
stopping as drivers mostly gave way to them. It was also segregated cycle provision on
shown to be safer than the intersection which preceded it, carriageway, and left shows
but perceptions by people using it were that it was less safe us a totally segregated cycling
although they did feel that it had improved the area and provision.
traffic flow through the junction.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 44

FULLY SEGREGATED ROUNDABOUT, BUT CYCLISTS + PEDESTRIANS SHARE THE FOOTWAY | IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

SEGREGATED CYCLE ROUNDABOUT | IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 45

DUTCH-STYLE ROUNDABOUT BEING TRIALLED BY THE TRANSPORT RESEARCH LABORATORY FOR TfL
Credit: Cyclists in the City

A FULLY SEGREGATED ROUNDABOUT | THE NETHERLANDS

Credit: London Cycling Campaign

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 46

A FULLY SEGREGATED ROUNDABOUT | THE NETHERLANDS

THE CROW DESIGN MANUAL (HOLLAND) REQUIREMENTS The CROW manual also makes recommendations for how
FOR CYCLE PROVISION AT ROUNDABOUTS to separate a cycle track from the road at a roundabout.
(Cited from http://wiki.coe.neu.edu/) A “relatively quiet” roundabout, up to 6000 PCUs per day,
requires no dedicated bicycle facilities. However, installing
The safest roundabout for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles a cycle track is still encouraged to improve subjective safety
is a single lane roundabout. Two lane roundabouts are still (the feeling of safety); many cyclists, especially children,
safe for vehicles, and the CROW manual says they’re safer feel uncomfortable sharing a sharply curved lane with
than signalized intersections, but Dutch practice does not motor vehicles. Above 6000 PCUs, dedicated cycle tracks are
place bicycles at multiple lane roundabouts. The appropriate required. Striped bike lanes are not recommended.
bike facility for a multi-lane roundabout in Dutch practice is a The CROW manual also states that at the location where a
fully separated bypass route or a below grade underpass. For cycle track cross the roundabout legs, the bike facility needs
this reason, multi-lane roundabouts are almost never built in to be extremely visible and conspicuous. A driver of a motor
urban areas. vehicle should have excellent sight lines while approaching
On single lane roundabouts in rural areas with light traffic, the roundabout exit, and be looking for a bicycle traveling
bicycles sometimes share the circulatory lanes with cars. parallel to them on their right. The facility itself should
Most of the time, however, Dutch roundabouts have a also be clearly designated, with red asphalt, or other visibly
separate path (cycle track) for bicycles. Dutch policy is that different pavement, and proper signage. Furthermore, the
within built-up (urbanized) areas, the bike path has priority entries and exits to / from the roundabout should have the
where it crosses roundabout entries and exits, while in rural “shark’s teeth” marking applied to the pavement indicating
areas the bike path must yield priority at roundabout entries that the motorist must yield to crossing cyclists, and the
and exits. “elephant’s feet” marking indicating the location of the cycle
track crossing (because colored pavement is not sufficiently
visible at night). In the photo below, in addition to all those
features, there is a speed hump marking, because the cycle
track and pedestrian crossing is raised.

CYCLIST PRIORITY AT DUTCH ROUNDABOUTS

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 47

DIFFERENT TYPES OF DUTCH ROUNDABOUTS FROM
BICYCLE DUTCH
(Cited from http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/a-
modern-amsterdam-roundabout/)

TURBO ROUNDABOUT

A turbo-roundabout is usually several lanes wide and has a Dutch Cyclists’ Union is therefore not happy with turbo-
very special spiral shape. The aim of turbo-roundabouts is to roundabouts combined with at-grade crossings, especially in
get the traffic flow into a higher speed. For that reason it has the built-up area. One such Turbo-roundabout in Eindhoven
been made impossible to change lanes on the roundabout is notorious. The turbo-roundabout proposed in Bedford
itself with a physical division between the lanes. Sometimes doesn’t even have separate cycling infra! Cyclists are
with only a narrow divider, but sometimes simply by (a expected to use the roundabout. Given the fact that due to the
lot of) space. This eliminates weaving conflicts and that dividers and the narrow lanes, traffic is unable to overtake
makes that traffic can flow very fast. In the Dutch situation cyclists, that is a recipe for disaster!
a turbo-roundabout always has separate cycling infra at
some distance, often grade separated. Sometimes, on level
crossings, cyclists have to give way to motor traffic entering
and leaving the roundabout. Because of the high speeds and
the multiple lanes, that can be a difficult undertaking. The

Small Dutch Turbo Roundabout. Clearly visible are the Large Dutch Turbo Roundabout. Clearly visible is the grade
grade separated bicycle crossings on two sides. Turbo separated cycle crossing to the left. The spiral shape makes
roundabouts are not suited for cycle traffic. The high that there is a separate route for traffic for each possible
speeds also make at grade crossings, even at some direction. Drivers cannot change their direction once they
distance, dangerous. are on the roundabout. Traffic chooses a direction before it
gets to the roundabout.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 48

‘ORDINARY’ ROUNDABOUT (without priority for cyclists) ‘ORDINARY’ ROUNDABOUT (with priority for cyclists)

Normal roundabouts in the Netherlands are usually only The roundabouts inside the built-up area are generally built
one lane wide. They are kept small, so the radius is tight. with a separated cycle path in the shape of a perfect circle.
That decreases speeds. When they are built outside the This makes clear that cyclists have priority. This is the type
built-up area cyclists do not have priority. Cyclists cross the of roundabout that TfL is testing. One important feature is
entrances and exits at some distance. That is easier because the space for exactly one car between the cycle path and the
of the low speeds and because of the fact that cyclists only roundabout itself. Cars entering the roundabout can wait
have to cross one lane at the time. To make clear cyclists do there to give traffic on the roundabout priority, without being
not have priority, the shape of the cycle tracks is not circular. in the way of cyclists. Cars leaving the roundabout can wait
Of course there are also shark-teeth on the surface and give- there to give passing cyclists priority without being in the way
way signs to also make the priority clear. of motor traffic on the roundabout.

Dutch roundabout without priority for cyclists. The design Dutch roundabout with priority for cyclists on the circular
of the cycle paths is not circular to make that clear. This separated cycle path all around the roundabout. This type
type is usually seen outside of built-up areas (and in some of design is for the built-up area. This is also the design of
municipalities that do not comply with the guidelines, like the Amsterdam roundabout of the videos in this post and
Assen). also the design TfL is testing. These roundabouts have
existed since 1992 when the first one was built in Enschede.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 49

SPECIALS
11 BUS STOPS

CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK’S ADVICE ON CYCLE

TRACK DESIGN AT BUS STOPS

•• Cycle lanes which go around bus stops should be marked

by wide dashed lines and additional cycle symbols.
•• Bus stops should be placed at least 20m before junctions.
•• Assuming that the cycle tracks run behind bus stops, the
recommendation is for a mini-zebra across the track.
The bus waiting area between the carriageway and the
off-street cycle track should be between 1.5-2.5m
wide.

THE LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARDS TALKING ABOUT

CYCLE TRACK ROUTING AT BUS STOPS

Cycle lanes should not normally be routed around the

outside of a bus stop cage, unless it is a terminus stop or
layover space. However, there may be locations where it is
appropriate to route a cycle lane outside a bus stop cage,
particularly if the cycle lane on the approach to the bus cage
is located outside routinely occupied parking or loading bays.

STOCKHOLM DESIGN STANDARDS DESIGN OPTIONS USING

A BUS ISLAND (ABOVE) + WITH PARALLEL BUS LOADING
(BELOW).

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 52

IRISH NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY’S OPTIONS FOR
BUS STOP DETAILING.

A CYCLE LANE AND BUS STOP DETAIL, PARIS

BUS STOP DETAILS IN COPENHAGEN: WITH + WITHOUT ‘ZEBRA’

MARKINGS

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 53

 CASE STUDY BIKE TRACKS + BUS STOPS
CASE STUDY

In February 2013, I was with some folk and we were talking In doing this, I ran through a variety of slides showing
about one of the latest ‘vexed issues’ in street design: how existing layouts in similar situations from other European
to deal with off-carriageway cycle tracks when they pass countries and Britain, so that we could discuss what seemed
bus stops; and I’ll begin these comments by stating that, at to us to be good and bad ideas in different contexts. Although
least and at last, this is a ‘vexed issue’ rather than a non- it gave the group a rather sad insight as to how I spend my
issue. The fact that we’re having to think about how best to holidays and spare time, the slides were valuable in enabling
design in the context of better provision for cycling is a good the pros and cons of different layouts to be debated. One
thing. As a cliché goes for football managers who can’t play thing we quickly realised was that the ‘floating bus stop’
all their very talented players at the same time: ‘it’s a nice conundrum is in fact a subset of a broader design challenge:
problem to have’. what to do when a cycle tracks pass through areas that are
Our meeting arose from concern expressed by some also a focus of pedestrian activity; as, for example, outside
who represent pedestrians’ interests about the design of railway stations or where people stand while waiting to cross
proposed ‘floating bus stops’ (bus stop by-passes for bikes) at Pelicans. (The photos below help to illustrate.)
on the extended ‘Cycle Superhighway’ in Stratford, East
London (CS2). This concern had been provoked specifically by
the following sketch, published by Transport for London.

Working with Living Streets (of which I’m a Trustee), the Where the cycle track meets the waiting area for a pelican
meeting was called for two main reasons: (a) to try and head crossing on Brighton prom.
off any unnecessary, unedifying and helpful ‘us and them’
exchanges between ‘cyclists’ and ‘pedestrians’, bearing
in mind the many priorities for change that are shared
by people who walk and cycle in urban streets; and (b) to
see if we could contribute positively to the development of
design thinking on the relationship between bus stops and
cycle tracks, of which there is – sadly – all too little British
experience. (I’ve seen a few in Brighton and London; but only
a few.)
My take on the evening was that it was a hugely constructive
get-together, attended by eight people (including me)
representing Living Streets (national and local groups),
the Royal National Institute of Blind People, the London
Cycling Campaign. Having a wheelchair user at the table
was particularly helpful. We started by trying to clarify
pedestrians’ concerns about ‘floating bus stops’ (and the
implications of the sketch above, in particular), but quickly
moved on to shared aspirations for street design in general,
and then set about trying to establish principles to help guide A cycle track awash with pedestrians outside Kingston
‘floating bus stop’ design in the UK. Station in the morning peak

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 54

The meeting was scheduled to last an hour and a half, but •• While the purpose of better cycle tracks is to make
we happily spent much longer working our way forward in
cycling be and seem both safer and more convenient, the
a positive and, as I said, constructive atmosphere. There
existence of a cycle track does not mean there will be
was no formal note of the meeting but, unless I’m gravely
mistaken, the following could reasonably be said in summary unbroken priority for cycle movement along it. Though
of our deliberations. breaks in cycle priority should be minimised, yielding to
pedestrians will be appropriate in some locations, and
design should both encourage and enable cyclists to yield
•• There was strong in-principle support for the introduction as necessary.
of cycle infrastructure, including protected cycle tracks,
that is likely to encourage mass cycling. •• Generally, design should encourage mutual awareness
(and indeed what a leading cycling campaigner recently
•• It was recognised that the introduction of cycle tracks termed ‘mutual generosity’) on the part of both groups of
that are neither conventional carriageway nor footway, users – people on bikes and people on foot – and make
and relatively unfamiliar on British streets, will plain the relative priorities for each in any given location.
inevitably be found confusing by some users (especially
pedestrians), at least at first.

•• Design should therefore generally seek to differentiate

clearly between footways and cycleways. This is to For the present, I leave you with a photo I took in France. I
minimise the likelihood both of collisions and of the think it’s appropriate.
perception by pedestrians that cycling on cycle tracks is
‘pavement cycling’.

•• Implementing protected cycle tracks (facilities that are

separated from the vehicle carriageway but immediately
adjacent to it) in complex urban streets is bound to
give rise to the potential for conflict with pedestrians
in certain locations/types of location (e.g. at bus stops,
especially the busier ones)

•• The default option in such circumstances must be to

address the design challenge presented, not to avoid it
by seeking to divert cyclists into the traffic carriageway
(where the consequences of any conflicts are potentially
much more serious).

•• Locations of potential conflict between pedestrians and

cyclists can be considered like junctions, with relative
priorities designated, and designed for, on a site-specific
basis, according to assessments of relative numbers
and proportions of pedestrians and cyclists, the space
available, and the complexity of local pedestrian activity
patterns.

JOHN DALES | URBAN MOVEMENT

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 55

12 CAR PARKING

CYCLING EMBASSY OF DENMARK’S GUIDANCE FOR LAYING

OUT PARKING ALONG CYCLE TRACKS
If necessary, a 1m wide longitudinal island should be placed
between cycle tracks and on-street parking, a kerb isn’t
necessary between the track and the island. Alternatively
the cycle track can be widened by an additional 1m.

NACTO DESIGN GUIDELINES GUIDANCE FOR LAYING OUT

PARKING ALONG CYCLE TRACKS

A 0.1m solid white line should be used between parking and

cycle lanes, and the lane should be at least 1.8m wide.

Running Parking bays inbetween traffic lanes and the cycle facility gives cyclists protection from moving vehicles. However,
a buffer strip of some sort should be included in order to stop cyclists getting hit be opening car doors.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 56

LONDON CYCLE DESIGN STANDARDS GUIDANCE FOR
LAYING OUT PARKING ALONG CYCLE TRACKS

Removal or re-location of parking to a side road may be the

best solutions for cyclists. If not, an advisory lane should be
run alongside the parking bays with a gap of between 0.5-
1m.
If there is parking on a route where cycle lanes are
proposed then measures should be taken to provide a
satisfactory situation. Removal or relocation of the parking
to a side-road or into a specially constructed bay may be
the best option for cyclists. The normal solution will be to
run an advisory cycle lane on the outside of marked parking
bays. With either constructed or marked bays sufficient
clearance should be created so that cyclists are not
unnecessarily endangered by the opening of vehicle doors.
This can be achieved by leaving a gap of 0.5-1.0m between
the inside of the cycle lane and the edge of the parking bay,
giving adequate entry and exit tapers
Where there are short gaps between parking bays,
including at junctions, then the lane should maintain its
position in the road rather than zigzag back to the kerb-line.
A maximum distance of about 30-35m is appropriate for
this (as shown on the diagram below). The diagram shows
the normal route that a cyclist would take where there is
a gap in the parking. I:5 exit tapers and 1:10 entry tapers
are normally appropriate, although as this will depend on
cyclists’ individual speeds, gradients and other conditions
may need to be assessed.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 57

13 FILTERED PERMABILITY

CYCLING ENGLAND MANUAL FOR STREETS:

Design Portfolio - A.05 Exemptions to TROs 6.4.2 Cycle access should always be considered on links
Cyclists benefit greatly when given exemption from the between street networks which are not available to
requirements of traffic regulation orders (TROs) that motor traffic. If an existing street is closed off, it should
create road closures, one-way streets, turning bans and generally remain open to pedestrians and cyclists.
vehicle restricted areas. Exemption will invariably provide
advantage and permeability by shortening journey time and Care needs to be taken to ensure that parked vehicles do
distance cycled as well as improving accessibility. Where not obstruct openings created for cyclists at road closures.
such orders result in a reduction in the volume and speed In some instances, such as town centres, this may be
of motor traffic this can encourage more cycling through addressed by the introduction of parking restrictions but
the creation of safer and more pleasant cycling conditions these may prove difficult to enforce. In these circumstances
on the roads affected. If cyclists are not given exemption physical measures such as build outs, cycle logos or
from these types of TRO, it will usually involve them in a hatching may be more effective. If bollards are used
frustrating detour which will invariably be more heavily to prevent motor vehicles from travelling through the
trafficked and hazardous than the route the TRO has denied closure, the gaps between them should be at least 1.5m
them. This can be a serious deterrent to cycling. In addition, wide . Bollards directly next to cycle gaps should be made
it may also result in some cyclists ignoring the TRO and conspicuous to all users, including pedestrians who might
following their desired route without the protection of also choose to use the gap. Another way of effecting the
formal provision. closure is to place bollards across the full road width. With
more than one gap to choose from, cyclists are less likely to
Cyclists should therefore be exempted from all such orders be obstructed by parked vehicles.
as a matter of course unless there are overriding safety
considerations which preclude it. Providing an exemption BANNED TURNS
for cyclists when a TRO is first introduced is far easier and Cyclists should generally be exempt from banned turning
less costly than adding the exemption at a later date. Within movements unless specific safety concerns dictate
the ‘core, low speed urban area’ at the heart of towns otherwise. The order giving effect to the ban will need to
and cities the exemption should generally be the norm. exempt cyclists. An ‘Except cycles’ plate to diagram 954.4
On higher speed/volume roads such as inner ring roads, should be placed underneath the appropriate regulatory
main radials etc there will need to be a more considered sign (usually diagram 612 No right turn or 613 No left turn).
approach where the desired movement might be offered It may be necessary to provide traffic islands with bollards
via an alternative such as a toucan crossing for example. A accompanied by appropriate road markings and signs to
cycle audit of all proposed TROs will help identify the best protect cyclists waiting to make the turning manoeuvre.
approach.

ROAD CLOSURES
Road closures, and similar measures such as bus gates,
act as very effective traffic-calming devices because they
remove through motor traffic and thus prevent rat-running.
Where a road is to be physically closed to motor vehicles,
an exemption and a cycle gap in the closure should be
provided. These should be a minimum of 1.5m wide to allow
tandems, trailers and electric wheelchairs to pass through
with good visibility of adjacent roads and pedestrians on
the footway. Gaps positioned in the centre of closure are
less likely to be blocked by motor vehicles and any kerbs
leading into them should be placed at a radius of curvature
suitable for cycle use . Existing road closures where no
such features have been provided should be reviewed, and
wherever possible re-opened for cycle use.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 58

ROADS CLOSED TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC TO CREATE CYCLE ONLY STREETS USING BOLLARDS (ABOVE) AND TREES (BELOW) | HACKNEY

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 59

14 ACCESSORIES

PUBLIC CYCLE PUMP | LONDON PUBLIC CYCLE WORKSHOP FACILITIES | USA

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 60

‘PLANTLOCK’ CYCLE STANDS / PLANTERS ARE BECOMING COMMON SIGHT THROUGHOUT LONDON

TEMPORARY CYCLE PARKING THROUGHOUT LONDON HIGHLIGHTS THE EFFICIENCY OF CYCLE PARKING OVER VEHICULAR

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 61

BINS ALONG CYCLE ROUTES ANGLED TO HELP CYCLISTS + FOOT STANDS AT LIGHTS OFFER CYCLISTS A LITTLE COMFORT WHILE THEY
WAIT

CYCLE + PEDESTRIAN ONLY BRIDGES PROMOTE CYCLING AND WALKING

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 62

A BIKE ‘ESCALATOR’ HELPS PEOPLE GET THEIR BIKES UP STAIRS....POSSIBLY A LITTLE HEAVY HANDED

SADDLE COVERS ATTACHED TO BIKE STANDS

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 63

ELEGANT CYCLE PARKING CAN CREATE A PIECE OF PUBLIC ART AS WELL

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 64

CYCLING + PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC LIGHTS | COPENHAGEN

BIKE HUB | EALING

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 65

ENSURE DRAINAGE GRATES ARE LAID FLUSH AND MAINTAINED ON CYCLE LANES. IF ON-CARRIAGEWAY DRAINAGE GRATES ARE USED
THE ‘STRIPES’ SHOULD BE LAID PERPENDICULAR TO THE KERB OR THEY SHOULD BE MADE UP OF A GRID.

POORLY LAID AND MAINTAINED GRATES, AND ONES LAID

PARALLEL TO THE KERB CAN BRING CYCLISTS OFF THEIR BIKES

ON CYCLE TRACKS ALTERNATIVE DRAINAGE SOLUTIONS SHOULD GRATES LAID PERPENDICULAR TO THE KERB ARE CONSIDERABLY
BE INVESTIGATED TO HELP CREATE THE SMOOTHEST RIDING SAFER FOR CYCLISTS
SURFACE POSSIBLE

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 66

AN AUTOMATED CYCLE COUNTER IN COPENHAGEN, PARTLY OBSCURED BY AN URBAN MOVEMENT FACT-FINDING MISSION.

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 67

CYCLING IN THE CIT Y A COMPENDIUM OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE 68