Planning for cycle users

Introduction

Attracting more people to choose cycling requires a high level of service to be considered at all levels of policy, planning and delivery. A network-wide, end-to-end journey approach must be taken to ensure that high-quality infrastructure is implemented, maximising the potential to unlock suppressed demand.

Providing high-quality facilities which access all destinations, enabling more people to make their journeys by cycle, will positively contribute to the priorities of the National Transport Strategy (NTS2).

Cycle user requirements are unique. Cycles need to be planned for as vehicles within the road network, but their detailed requirements at the beginning and end of journeys are more closely aligned with pedestrian movements. An integrated approach is therefore necessary to ensure the freedom of movement of different users, and to manage the interactions between these users on different parts of the network.

This chapter sets out:

• The needs of different cycle users and how they interact with other users
• The underlying principles of design
• How designers should provide a high level of service for all users
• The design process to develop infrastructure in accordance with these principles
• How to plan for cycling at a network level and within new developments
• The requirements of the design review to be undertaken for all schemes.

Cycle users’ needs

The three key elements that influence the infrastructure needs of cycle users are:

• the type of user
• their journey purpose
• the type of cycle vehicle they use for the trip.

The requirements of each of these elements inform the core design principles and levels of service that follow.

Type of user and journey purpose

Table 2.1 provides a summary of different types of cycle user, the typical purpose of their cycle journeys and the resulting design requirements. To provide a cycle network that will serve the needs of everyone, Cycling by Design requires designers to deliver infrastructure that will provide a high level of service.

Table 2.1: Cycle user requirements

Type of User	Level of User	Typical Journey Purposes	Requirements
New and Less Confident Users	Will include 'novice' users - younger children, accompanied cycle users and those new to cycling	Learning to ride / Travelling to school / Neighbourhood trips for recreation or to visit family and friends	Safety is the primary requirement. Quiet routes, quiet streets and off-carriageway facilities are essential
New and Less Confident Users	Will also include 'intermediate' users - older children, some accompanied and disabled cycle users, those who may cycle less frequently and those who may be returning to cycling after an absence	Travelling to school or work / Neighbourhood trips for recreation or to visit family and friends / Local everyday trips, such as commuting, caring, shopping and leisure	Safety remains the primary requirement, but convenience and ease of cycling will be significant motivating factors. Direct routes with protection from traffic are likely to be most effective
Confident, Existing Users	Will include those who cycle frequently and with confidence to mix with motor traffic	Regular commuting / Cycle courier services / Longer distance leisure trips and cycle tourism	Safety and convenience but may choose the most direct route with least delay, including when this is on the road carriageway

Designers have to understand user needs, and design infrastructure with all cycle users in mind. Designs that meet the needs of only confident cycle users should be the exception (see Level of Service in section 2.4).

It is also critical that, regardless of user type, cycling is recognised as a distinct mode of travel, operating at a significantly higher speed than walking and wheeling, and therefore with different requirements.

Cycle vehicle

There are a range of cycle vehicles that users choose and examples of these are provided in Table 2.2. Designers should provide for the anticipated vehicles.

To account for the various dimensions and additional turning requirements of some of these cycle vehicles, design guidance in this document is based on a design vehicle that is 2.8 m long with a dynamic width envelope of 1.0 m. The dynamic width envelope represents the physical width of the cycle, its user and the width within which lateral movement occurs when riding on a link.

Swept path analysis has been undertaken using this design vehicle. A wider dynamic envelope of 1.2 m has been used at bends.

Table 2.2: Cycle vehicle requirements

Cycle Vehicle	Requirements
Standard	1.8 m length / 0.65 m width / 1.65 m outer turning radius
Tandem	Outer turning radius up to 3.2 m
Recumbent	Outer turning radius up to 3.2 m / Lower eye height for visibility envelope
Cargo Bike	Up to 0.85 m width / Outer turning radius up to 2.65 m
Handcycle	Outer turning radius up to 2.65 m / Lower eye height for visibility / Lower clearance to kerbs and other objects
Wheelchair User Tricycle	Outer turning radius up to 3.2 m
Additional Child Trailer	Outer turning radius up to 2.65 m
Additional Trailer Bike	Outer turning radius up to 3.2 m

The effort required to cycle

Cycling requires physical effort to build up and maintain momentum and to retain balance. Minimising the effort required is key to making the journey attractive and convenient, regardless of age and ability. This can be done by:

• Minimising the number of times that a cycle user is required to slow down, stop and regain momentum
• Where possible, avoiding routes with steep gradients, even if this makes the route slightly less direct
• Providing smooth and well-maintained cycle route surfaces to minimise resistance
• Minimising crossfall on the route (see Chapter 3)
• Including landscaping and other features to help break headwinds and reduce air resistance.

Core design principles

Cycle user needs are represented by the six core design principles. These are summarised below alongside the intended key outcomes for cycling infrastructure:

• Safety: Designs should minimise the potential for actual and perceived accident risk. Perceived risk is a key barrier to cycle use. Users should feel safe as well as be safe at all stages of their journey, including parking at their origin and destination. It is important to provide consistency of design and avoid ambiguity.
• Coherence: Cycling infrastructure should form a coherent network which links origins and destinations. This allows the cycle network to link communities, facilities and integrate with other modes of travel. Routes should be continuous from an origin to a destination, easy to navigate, well signed, intuitive and of a consistently high quality.
• Directness: Cycle users should be offered the most direct route based on existing and latent trip desire lines, minimising detours and delays. Directness has both geographical and time elements, with delays at junctions and crossings, as well as physical detours, affecting it.
• Comfort: Cycle user comfort is critical to journey experience and making cycling an everyday choice for users. Routes should minimise mental and physical stress and effort, be convenient and avoid complex manoeuvres. Smooth, uninterrupted surfaces with gentle gradients and secure, sheltered cycle parking will enhance comfort. Cycling infrastructure should be well-maintained to ensure its continued comfort and appeal.
• Attractiveness: Infrastructure should be designed in harmony with its surroundings in such a way that the whole experience makes cycling an attractive option. A route should complement and enhance the area through which it passes. Lighting, personal security, aesthetics, environmental quality and noise are important considerations.
• Adaptability: Cycling infrastructure should be able to evolve and improve as cycle demands change. Meeting the preceding design principles in a way that allows infrastructure to adapt to changing user needs will form a critical component of cycle networks. Trialling of potential measures using more flexible infrastructure will assist in meeting this aim.

By applying the guidance contained within this document and adhering to these core design principles, designers can provide holistic solutions that cater for the broadest range of people, including new and less confident cycle users. Embedding these core design principles within the guidance allows designers to apply this guidance with all users in mind.

Clause Number	Description
2.3.1	Designers should always aim to provide infrastructure that meets these principles and the Sustainable Travel Hierarchy set out in Chapter 1.
2.3.2	Designers should use the core design principles when setting design objectives.

Ultimately, cycling infrastructure should form part of an integrated transport system and built environment where users will, at different times, need to walk, wheel, cycle, and travel by public transport and private motor vehicle.

Level of service

It is a critical requirement of Cycling by Design that all new or improved cycling infrastructure, road improvements, new developments and public realm improvements are designed to meet the needs of all cycle users. The level of service (LOS) indicators will help designers to identify the strengths and weaknesses of their design and identify aspects to be improved to achieve a high LOS.

Clause Number	Description
2.4.1	Designers should aim to provide a high LOS for any cycling infrastructure or road improvement project in Scotland.
2.4.2	A robust Design Review process (see Section 2.8) should be undertaken on all designs.

Note: The Design Review process is used to document and explain all design decisions, including those where a high LOS cannot be achieved.

Table 2.3 provides a summary of the key LOS indicators against each core design principle. These indicators are expanded for specific elements of design guidance in the chapters that follow, to remind designers of their importance when making key decisions.

A high level of service will be suitable for most users, including new and less confident users.

A medium level of service may not be suitable for some users, particularly novice users.

A low level of service will not be suitable for a range of users, including novice and intermediate users.

Table 2.3: Summary of Level of Service Indicators

Principle	High Level of Service	Medium Level of Service	Low Level of Service
Safety	Cycle users are always protected from motor traffic when required by the conditions set in Table 3.2 in Chapter 3.	In some cases, cycle users are expected to mix with motor traffic in higher speed or volume conditions that are set out in Table 3.2 in Chapter 3.	In some cases, cycle users are expected to mix with motor traffic in significantly higher speed or volume conditions that are set out in Table 3.2 in Chapter 3.
Coherence	Cycle routes are continuous and fully joined-up. They allow cycle users to maintain consistent speed, are well-signed and intuitive.	Cycle routes contribute to a network, but users experience some disruption when connecting between routes, and navigation may be difficult.	Cycle users must dismount or are 'abandoned' at the end of a route.
Directness	Cycle route is at least as direct as the equivalent motor traffic journey, with minimal need to stop or give-way. / Delay for cycle users at junctions is less than for motor traffic.	Cycle route is up to 20% less direct than the equivalent motor traffic journey, with some need to stop or give-way. / Delay for cycle users at junctions is equal to motor traffic delay.	Cycle route is more than 20% less direct than the equivalent motor traffic journey, with frequent need to stop or give-way. / Delay for cycle users at junctions is greater than for motor traffic.
Comfort	Cycle route surfaces are machine laid, smooth and well-maintained (at least as regularly as the road network). / Desirable minimum widths and gradients are fully achieved.	Sections of route are hand-laid with frequent joints. / Route is maintained less frequently than the road network. / Desirable minimum widths or gradients are not achieved for some of the route.	Sections of the route are unbound, bumpy, not regularly maintained or otherwise hazardous. / Desirable minimum widths or gradients are not achieved for the majority of the route.
Attractiveness	Cycle route and parking areas are well lit, overlooked and do not create any personal security issues for users. / The cycle route adds to the sense of place in the area, encouraging people to spend time there.	Some sections of the route are infrequently lit or not overlooked. Parking areas are secure but not overlooked or are insufficient in number.	The majority of the route is infrequently lit or not overlooked. Parking areas are not secure or are insufficient in number.
Adaptability	Cycle route and parking areas have the flexibility to expand, evolve or adapt to changing demands.	Only some of the cycle route or parking areas has the flexibility to expand, evolve or adapt to changing demands.	No scope to amend cycling infrastructure once installed.

Planning and delivery process

Multi-modal / strategic appraisal

Cycling by Design sets out network planning and design guidance to be implemented within the wider context of planning, delivering and maintaining cycle schemes, cycle networks or other cycle facilities developed in the built environment.

The decision to develop a cycle route or cycle network should be the product of a multi-modal or strategic appraisal process that has identified and appraised potential transport interventions to address evidenced-based transport problems or opportunities. An Equality Impact Assessment should be available to ensure that the needs of all potential users have been considered from the start. This should be regularly reviewed and updated throughout all subsequent stages including the design stage and at key decision points.

Whenever Scottish Government funding, support or approval is needed to change the transport system, an appraisal using Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) is required, and its use is also encouraged in other circumstances. STAG represents best practice guidance for transport appraisals and follows a structure and methodology that is consistent with the UK Government’s Green Book (Central Government Guidance on Appraisal and Evaluation).

Whatever appraisal process is followed, it should provide decision-makers with the information they need in a clear, structured format. Emerging proposals that require cycle-specific transport design guidance should follow the guidance outlined in this document, and information derived during the appraisal process can be used in the development of a cycle scheme.

Ultimately, a robust case for change is required to have been clearly demonstrated in appraisal / assessment work alongside the development of options. This is done prior to the design stage.

Additionally, depending on the type of scheme and / or its potential effects, other assessments may be required, e.g., a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) or a Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA). Relevant authorities can provide further advice and guidance where relevant

Cycle scheme planning and delivery

Building on these outputs, designers and those planning cycle networks should fully embed the core design principles set out in this document at all stages of the planning and delivery process, as identified in Figure 2.1 and further set out in this section.

Cycling by Design sets out network planning and design guidance to be implemented within the wider context of planning, delivering and maintaining cycle schemes, cycle networks or other cycle facilities developed in the built environment.

Stakeholder and community engagement will form a key part of each stage. Engaging with all relevant stakeholders throughout the planning and delivery process will be an important step towards meeting the Overseeing Organisation’s Public Sector Equality Duty.

Planning and Delivery Process

• Multi-modal / strategic proposal
• Set design objectives
• Assess demand
• Network planning (refer to Section 2.6)
• Assess and consult options
• Prioritise investment
• Design (refer to Chapters 3 to 6)
• Review and audit
• Construct
• Post-construction: Maintain, monitor, evaluate and improve (related to objects)
• Multi-modal / strategic monitoring and evaluation

Set design objectives

Appropriate design objectives should be set and aligned to the wider transport objectives for the area as follows:

• When setting design objectives for the development of a cycle network, these should relate to how that network can contribute to the wider policy aims of the area. Design objectives could be based on the coverage or density of the network, the connections it will make, the number of people who will use it and how these factors align to the desired social, health, environmental, safety and economic policy outcomes for the area. This will be informed by the Local Transport Strategy and Local Development Plan for the area.
• When setting design objectives for a cycle route or road improvement project, these should relate to how that project will help to meet the design objectives of the network that it forms part of (and in turn provide the same linkages to wider policy).

In both cases, the design objectives should be set to enable safe, high-quality cycling infrastructure to be designed and delivered to maximise the participation of cycling in that area. The design objectives should aim to provide a high level of service against each core design principle. Also, it will be important to review the established multi-modal / strategic objectives which will have sought to address the problems or opportunities identified during that appraisal process.

In all circumstances, the design objectives should form the basis of the design options. Design objectives could be refined as the design process progresses, and more information becomes available, but identifying clear and measurable objectives will allow the performance of the infrastructure to be effectively monitored and evaluated upon implementation.

Therefore, design objectives should be set with SMART principles from the start. A SMART objective will be:

• Specific: will say in precise terms what is sought and where
• Measurable: will set out the metrics that will be used as an indicator of success
• Achievable: there is general agreement that the objective set can be reached
• Realistic: the objective is a sensible indicator or proxy for the change which is sought
• Time bound: the objective will be associated with an agreed timeframe.

Sources of information for setting design objectives include:

• Multi-modal / Strategic Appraisal
• Local and Regional Transport Strategies
• Walk Wheel Cycle Trust Places for Everyone guidance (for projects funded through that programme)
• Walk Wheel Cycle Trust Cycling for Everyone guidance
• Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance
• DMRB GG 142 Walking, Cycling and Horse Riding Assessment and Review (for trunk road projects but can assist in identifying objectives more widely)
• Assessing impact and the Public Sector Equality Duty: a guide for public authorities (Scotland), from the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Assess demand

A detailed understanding of existing local travel patterns can be informed by surveys of walking, cycling, wheeling, public transport and motor traffic journeys, and by census data on journeys to work and education. From this data, planners can establish the patterns of trips currently being made by cycling, as well as those short-to-medium length journeys that are being made by other modes but which could be encouraged towards cycling with improved infrastructure. Where available, the data should be disaggregated by parameters such as age, gender, income, disability.

In recognition of the message to plan and design for mass cycling, it is important to remember that these data sources may not reflect the full potential for cycle user trips, and that prevailing conditions or barriers may prevent people from making these trips. Such barriers may include disjointed cycle networks, personal security fears or routes that do not cater for different types of cycle vehicle.

It is equally important to estimate future travel patterns, which can be informed by analysis of future spatial planning contained within Local Development Plans and, where available, from transport models of the local area. This can be supplemented by behavioural surveys that can reveal the potential for modal shift or additional uptake in cycling under different future scenarios.

This will allow planners to set out the expected demand for cycling at a route and network level, now and in the future. This can be useful for the planning of the network and also to demonstrate to the public and decision makers the need for an improved network. The level of demand will also influence the geometric requirements of the scheme.

Sources of information for assessing demand include:

• Local development plans and transport strategies
• Local active travel strategies
• Cycling Scotland, Walk Wheel Cycle Trust and Local Authority cycle counters
• Network Planning Tool for strategic cycle network planning in Scotland,
• Regional Transport Models

Assess and consult on options

It is important that scheme options, at a network or route level, are fully assessed and consulted upon to arrive at the preferred scheme. Assessment of options should be undertaken against the design objectives set for the project and the core design principles.

While level of service indicators are primarily used to focus designers on how their designs will affect end-user experience, these may also be useful when assessing network or route options against each other.

Stakeholder consultation is vital to ensure that the assessment process takes full account of all relevant views of the options being developed and assessed. Consultation and engagement with communities, user groups, other interest groups, planning officers, transport officers, network maintenance teams and others should be undertaken from the earliest stages of network and route delivery.

Sources of information for assessment and consultation include:

• Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (as part of wider transport projects)
• Health Economic Assessment Tool (HEAT)
• National Standards for Community Engagement
• Place Standard tool

Prioritise investment

The planning and assessment steps of the process will help to guide priorities in cycle network and route delivery. This will allow decisions to link back to the design objectives set for the network as a whole and to guide investment priorities to those parts of the network where it will have the greatest overall benefit.

Priorities should be aligned to the wider policy outcomes of the area and to the ways in which the cycle route or network can contribute to the desired outcomes for health, environment, safety and place-making.

These priorities could relate to the removal of immediate barriers or the improved maintenance of existing routes. However, to have the greatest impact the focus should be on the expansion of the cycle network to provide fully connected, safe and accessible new routes for all, including those who are new and less confident cycle users.

Design, review and audit

Chapters 3 to 6 provide the detailed guidance on the design of cycling infrastructure. Additional requirements and guidance for the design of infrastructure can be found in:

• Designing Streets – providing Scottish Government policy on street design
• Roads for All: Good Practice Guide for Roads – providing Transport Scotland requirements for inclusive design for road infrastructure
• Walk Wheel Cycle Trust Traffic-Free and Greenways Design Guide – for the design of detached and remote cycle tracks
• Local Street Design Guidance – for specific local requirements on holistic street design
• National Roads Development Guide - produced by the Scottish Collaboration of Transportation Specialists, supported by Transport Scotland and Scottish Government Planning and Architecture Division. This document supports Designing Streets and expands on its principles to clarify the circumstances in which it can be used
• Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSGRD) – for the prescription of traffic signs and road markings
• Traffic Signs Manual – for the application of traffic signs and road markings
• Inclusive Mobility and Guidance on the Use of Tactile Paving Surfaces – for Department for Transport requirements in their design and application.

To ensure that these designs fully meet safety, quality and accessibility requirements, the following reviews and audits are required:

• Design Review – when developing designs for cycling infrastructure or road improvements, the Design Review process set out in Section 2.8 of this document should be used to record how the requirements of Cycling by Design have, or have not, been met. This will form one part of the Quality Audit required by Designing Streets for holistic street design projects
• Equality Impact Assessment – the Equality Impact Assessment should commence at the objective setting stage, be regularly updated during design, and should be reviewed and updated upon completion of the design to ensure that the design does not discriminate and improves accessibility where possible. An Equality Impact Assessment Tool template for projects supporting active travel has been developed by the Walk Wheel Cycle Trust in association with Transport Scotland
• Road Safety Audit – should be undertaken at preliminary and detailed design stages in line with DMRB GG 119
• For trunk road schemes, the review stage of DMRB GG 142 Walking, Cycling and Horse Riding Assessment and Review should be completed to ensure that the opportunities identified for cycling have been fully provided for in the design.

Post construction: maintain, monitor, evaluate and improve

Guidance on the maintenance of cycling infrastructure is provided in Chapter 3.

Targets for the monitoring of cycling infrastructure should be set at a network or route-specific level and linked to project design objectives. This will allow those planning cycling infrastructure to monitor the performance of the infrastructure against its original aims, and to set targets that are based on outcomes (such as the number of new cycle journeys on the network) rather than outputs (such as the total length of new cycle route).

Indicators should be established that will allow these targets to be measured regularly over a period of time in order to monitor the success of the infrastructure against its design objectives. The data that is available or will need to be collected to provide these indicators should be considered at the earliest stage, ideally when setting design objectives. Data sources may include cycle counters, user surveys and condition surveys of the infrastructure.

The performance of the network or cycle route can then be regularly evaluated against these indicators to identify trends and to establish any aspects of the infrastructure that can be improved.

Walk Wheel Cycle Trust Places for Everyone guidance provides further information on the monitoring and evaluation of projects that are funded through that programme, and can be applied to cycling infrastructure schemes more generally.

Network planning

Scottish Planning Policy and the National Planning Framework set the context for the development of sustainable, green, low carbon and integrated places across our cities, towns, villages, rural and island areas. Planning a network to ensure that every street is safe and comfortable to cycle on will play a key role in realising this ambition, and requires adherence to the planning and delivery process set out in Figure 2.1.

Network planning is informed by the setting of appropriate design objectives and the anticipated future demand for cycling at a local and regional level. It should identify the key origins and destinations that will generate the demand for cycling, the constraints and opportunities that exist to connect these places, and how best to link them through a fully connected network of routes.

Engagement with the local community and stakeholders is key. Local residents, businesses and other stakeholders have unique insight into the barriers and opportunities for cycling that will inform an understanding of demand, the gaps that need to be filled and the opportunities that exist to form a cohesive cycling network.

Local and regional transport authorities could consider cycle network planning independently, but there may be advantages to the delivery of a cycle network and its integration with other modes by developing this network plan when preparing Local Development Plans and Local and Regional Transport Strategies.

Network components

Cycle networks will generally comprise:

• Primary routes, which will link to key trip attractors, attract the highest demand for cycling and will often be used for commuting trips. Primary cycle routes will often be used to form active freeways in urban areas
• Secondary routes, which will link to local centres
• Local access routes, which will connect from primary and secondary routes into local neighbourhoods and streets at the beginning and end of journeys
• Long distance routes, which will often be used for recreation and touring purposes.

The network can be supported by core paths, which facilitate, promote and manage the exercise of access rights under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, and are identified as such in a local authority or National Park authority core paths plan. Note, there are no set physical standards for core paths.

The location, density and integration of these routes will vary depending on local network requirements. Guidance on how to approach this is set out in the following pages.

The routes themselves will be formed by a combination of cycle tracks that are remote from the road carriageway, cycle tracks adjacent to the carriageway and mixed traffic streets. The selection of these facilities will depend on a range of factors for each route and street, including motor traffic volume, speed, and local context. Guidance on the selection and design of these facilities is given in Chapter 3.

Where effective cycle routes satisfying the core design principles can be provided separately from bus routes, this is desirable as it eliminates interactions with bus stop users. This should consider accessibility to facilities along the cycle route.

Each route is also likely to accommodate cycle crossings of the road carriageway, junctions and accesses. Guidance on the design of these is given in Chapter 4 and 5.

A successful cycle network will include secure cycle parking and other facilities at the beginning and end of each journey. Guidance on these facilities is given in Chapter 6.

Network planning techniques

Different techniques are available to undertake a robust network planning exercise for cycling. Guidance on these is provided here. Regardless of the technique applied, a detailed understanding of local travel patterns and stakeholder participation will form critical early parts of the process.

With a strong understanding of potential demand, the following techniques may be used to identify potential routes on a new or expanded cycle network:

• Gap analysis – by plotting the expected demand for cycling against the current provision, planners will, in most cases, be able to identify the key gaps to be filled in the network. This will be obvious for the routes with the highest potential demand for cycling but care should also be taken to ensure that gaps for local access routes are identified. This approach may be all that is needed for most locations but can be supplemented by more sophisticated techniques for larger towns and cities.
• Mesh density – examining the overall coverage of the cycle network can help identify gaps for larger networks, such as those in larger towns and cities. This is achieved by plotting the existing or proposed cycle network and then calculating the density of that network within defined sub-areas. These sub-areas may be bound by the existing road network or land uses, or by more arbitrary means such as 1 km square cells. The density of the cycle network within each sub-area can then be compared to see where key gaps lie.

The aim should be for the cycle network to be at least as dense and to provide as much coverage as the road network for the same area. This essentially means that every street should provide a high level of service for cycling, either through low-traffic conditions or protected cycle facilities. This will ensure full equality of modal choice and that cycling is seen to be at least as convenient as other modes for short-to-medium length journeys.

Level of Service Indicators – Network Planning

In relation to Design Principle – Coherence

• High Level of Service: Cycle network density is less than 200 m between key primary and secondary routes. Cycle routes are continuous and fully joined-up. They allow cycle users to maintain consistent speed, are well-signed and intuitive.
• Medium Level of Service: Cycle network density is 200-800 m between key primary and secondary routes. Cycle routes contribute to a network but users experience some disruption when connecting between routes, and navigation may be difficult.
• Low Level of Service: Cycle network density is greater than 800 m between key primary and secondary routes. Cycle users must dismount or are ‘abandoned’ at the end of a route.

Integration with other modal networks

The planning and delivery of a cycle network will need to be fully integrated with the wider transport network in each city, town, village or rural area. There is often competition for space between walking, wheeling, cycling, public transport and motor traffic modes on an individual street or link. Reallocation of space in favour of sustainable modes will help to resolve these issues at the street level, but this may also be supported by taking a strategic network approach to the planning of each mode’s network.

One way to do this is to establish the desired outcome for each component of the network. For example:

• Primary cycle routes – able to carry high volumes of cycle users on the most direct routes between key destinations, maintaining an average speed of 15 kph. Typical mesh density of 400 to 800 metres
• Secondary cycle routes – providing direct connections to all residential centres. Typical mesh density of 200 to 400 metres
• Local access routes – all other streets.

A similar approach can be taken for the desired outcomes for the walking, wheeling, public transport and road networks in line with the desired policy outcomes for the area as a whole. These indicative networks can then be overlaid to identify where competition for space will be most prevalent when trying to meet the desired level of service on each network.

Strategic decisions can then be made by planners on how to make these ‘trade-offs’ at a network level to inform the allocation of space at a local street level. For example:

• The primary network for each mode should be prioritised (assuming that the primary network for walking, wheeling and cycling is more dense than the primary network for public transport, which in turn is more dense than the primary road network)
• Where the primary network for different modes compete for space, most priority should always be given to sustainable modes as set out in the Sustainable Travel Hierarchy.

This approach has been developed in Amsterdam as the ‘Plusnet’ method of network planning, as set out in Figure 2.2. The approach will be best suited to larger towns and cities but can be scaled to apply to smaller networks when planning cycle networks.

When defining networks for each mode, the aim should be for walking, wheeling and cycling to be at least as convenient, and ideally more convenient, than making the same journey by car. Figure 2.3 sets this out conceptually, with further details on how to apply this to urban and rural networks on the following pages.

Urban settings – Low Traffic Neighbourhoods

Low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) create safe cycle networks by:

• allowing through-movement for walking, wheeling, cycling and in some cases bus movements
• restricting the through-movement of motor traffic within defined neighbourhood areas
• allowing local access and egress by motor traffic for all homes and businesses (including deliveries and servicing).

This is achieved by the tactical placement of modal filters and other traffic management measures that restrict motor traffic movements and make travelling through the neighbourhood by sustainable modes more convenient. Cycle users withing the LTN should be enabled to adopt the primary riding position.

The benefits of LTNs in delivering cycle networks include:

• safer, calmer conditions for cycling
• more space for placemaking
• less through traffic on residential streets
• sustainable modes become more time efficient than private motor vehicles, thereby increasing the demand for the former and reducing demand for the latter
• cost effective solutions that are simpler to implement than providing protected cycling facilities on all streets.

Figure 2.4 illustrates a characteristic approach to the development of LTNs.

The steps involved in developing a successful LTN are:

Step 1 – Classify local streets

Identify the streets that are of most importance to strategic transport movements and those that require vehicle access for local residents and businesses only (including deliveries and servicing). This will be best facilitated through community workshops and wider stakeholder engagement to ensure that the function (and potential future function) of each street is informed by local knowledge.

Step 2 – Define size and structure of LTN

Based on this classification, the size and structure of the LTN should be defined as follows:

• The streets on the boundary of the LTN will cater for all transport movements, including primary cycle routes, public transport and through-traffic
• The ‘cells’ contained within these boundaries will be for local motor traffic access only, and will act as through routes for walking, wheeling, cycling and in some cases local bus movements
• The cells should be structured to ensure that key local trip attractors such as schools, community centres and parks are easily accessed by walking, wheeling and cycling
• The size of each cell will vary and will depend on the local context of these trip attractors. It should be large enough to make car journeys less convenient for short local trips, encouraging modal change for these trips, but not so large that local journeys within the cell become too long and encourage car use. Typically, 1.0 to 1.5 square kilometres will be a suitable size for a LTN.

Step 3 – Identify locations for filtering measures

These should be placed where they have the greatest impact in terms of restricting through motor traffic movements, whilst allowing motor traffic access to homes and permitting through movements by walking, wheeling and cycling (and in some cases by bus). This will be achieved by a combination of the measures set out in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: Low Traffic Neighbourhood measures

Measure	Purpose	Location
Modal filter	To restrict vehicle movements whilst permitting walking, wheeling and cycling. (further guidance in Chapter 3)	On streets or at junctions where this will help to remove through-traffic. Care is needed to minimise the lengths of any reverse movements needed by local motor traffic.
Pocket park	To create a green space between modal filters used for walking, wheeling, cycling and play.	On parts of streets where no local vehicle access is required.
Diagonal filters	To enforce turning restrictions at crossroad junctions, whilst permitting walking, wheeling and cycling in all movements.	Crossroad junctions
Turning restrictions	To restrict vehicle turning movements.	Junctions
One-way streets	To limit vehicle access or egress from a street as part of a wider network plan whilst permitting two-way cycle movement. (further guidance in Chapter 3)	Only on streets which can be designed to avoid any potential for increased motor traffic speed resulting from one-way operation.
Bus gates	To permit through-movements by local bus and cycling, whilst restricting through-traffic.	On key local bus routes that permeate low traffic neighbourhoods.

For all measures, keeping sign clutter to a minimum is a key objective. Using planters and other measures sympathetic to the local environment will enhance the placemaking aspect of the neighbourhood.

Step 4 - Design individual streets

To ensure that traffic speeds remain low and that conditions are created for comfortable cycling (further guidance is provided in Chapter 3). Identifying the function of individual streets within a local network will have a direct impact on how it is used by traffic. This could be by allocating certain streets as secondary cycle routes on a quiet route network, or providing opportunities for play-focussed activities around schools, parks or other local facilities.

Step 5 - Create connections between LTNs

With the right conditions established within each ‘cell’ of the network, it will be possible for planners to identify the key connections that need to be made between each cell and from the cells to the primary and secondary cycle network. By improving these connections, the accessibility of each neighbourhood by cycle can be significantly enhanced. Figure 2.5 provides an example of this at a network level in Bolton, as part of Greater Manchester’s proposed Bee Network.

Rural settings

For the purpose of Cycling by Design, rural settings comprise both rural roads (as defined by DMRB) and the villages and settlements that these roads pass through.

Although route choice is likely to be more limited in rural settings, opportunities exist to improve the connectivity and permeability of the cycle network and contribute to enhanced rural place-making, as illustrated in Figure 2.6.

The high movement function of most rural roads will make mixed use of the carriageway suitable for only a limited number of cycle users. Cycle tracks that are detached or remote from the carriageway are therefore preferable in most rural situations, with control of motor traffic speed and volume within villages and settlements a key objective to providing a connected and usable cycle network. Measures to reduce the speed of traffic on individual streets is provided in Chapter 3.

Network planning measures can support cycle use in rural settings. A hierarchy of streets and routes that are suitable for different types of cycle journey could be set as follows:

• Long-distance routes – the national cycle network and other long-distance routes that pass through rural settings are increasingly being delivered as detached cycle tracks that run alongside the main road network or as remote cycle tracks. Network planning considerations can help designers by considering alignments that limit the number and severity of design constraints that could lead to lower levels of service for users.
• Rural connecting routes – between settlements, the opportunities for cycling on lightly-trafficked roads and to restrict access to some of these roads by motor traffic will provide more attractive routes for local journeys and for connecting long distance routes to local centres.
• Quiet streets and lanes – where traffic speeds can be significantly reduced and the presence of those walking and cycling can be made clear.

The network should provide direct routes for cycle users to ensure that a high level of service is maintained.

Planning for new developments

When planning new development sites and new road schemes, there is a unique opportunity to build in cycle friendly conditions from the outset. The guidance provided in Cycling by Design should be applied to achieve a high level of service for cycling within all new developments and new roads.

In new developments there should be no existing physical constraints that cannot be overcome by good design to achieve a high level of service for active travel, and outcomes in accordance with the Sustainable Travel Hierarchy.

Clause	Description
2.7.1	Designs in new developments and for new road schemes should meet or exceed the highest level of service.

It is recognised that there may be existing constraints when linking the development to nearby facilities. The Overseeing Organisation will account for this when considering the Design Review that is submitted along with the design to support the planning application.

In meeting or exceeding the requirements, designers will help to create the conditions necessary within new developments to enable cycling within the development and to link the development with existing facilities, thereby contributing to national, regional and local policy targets and ambitions.

Designing Streets provides Scottish Government policy for street design, including new developments. This requires the layout of streets within new development sites to connect to their surroundings through permeable networks that encourage walking, wheeling and cycling.

The network planning approach that is set out in Section 2.6 supports this policy aim from a cycling perspective, enabling low traffic neighbourhoods with filtered access for motor traffic while delivering permeable access for cycling.

The opportunity exists to apply this approach to new development sites from the outset, rather than ‘retrofitting’ it to existing neighbourhoods. Therefore, new development sites have a vital role to play in creating cycle-friendly conditions within the development site and beyond by contributing to the expansion of the wider cycle network.

The cycle network plan will provide a framework for developers to understand:

• What cycling infrastructure is in place or will be in place to connect to the development
• The potential demand for that cycle network from those living, working in and visiting the development
• The planning authority’s expectations for the connections that need to be made from the cycle network to and through the development.

The components of the cycle network within and surrounding a new development site should comprise the same elements set out in Section 2.6:

• Primary routes, which will usually connect the development site to key trip attractors. For larger developments with key trip attractors themselves (such as schools, employment, or retail centres), it may be necessary to extend these primary routes into the development and to design these accordingly (see Chapter 3)
• Secondary routes, which will connect to local centres within the development
• Local access routes, comprising all other streets.

The layout of the cycle network within a new development site should:

• be at least as dense and ideally more dense than the road network. There should be no physical reason why this cannot be achieved within new development sites
• be more permeable than the road network
• provide internal streets that are designed to restrict traffic volumes and speeds such that they are low enough for mixed use (see Table 3.2 in Chapter 3). This can be achieved by the filtering of traffic during the planning of the street network (see Section 2.6) and through individual street design (see Chapter 3).

The planning of an internal network should be informed by the Local Development Plan and /or the regional and local transport strategies and the potential connections to the wider transport network. The design of the network will usually be informed by the Design and Access Statement and the Transport Assessment for the new development. The Transport Assessment is used to forecast the travel demands of the site and assess their impact on the surrounding network. Travel demand forecasts within the Transport Assessment should consider the potential for the increased levels of cycling that will be enabled by the measures described above. This will ensure that the potential cycling movements are not underestimated or the motor traffic movements over-estimated.

The Transport Assessment will form one part of the planning application being submitted for the site and should take account of the requirements of Cycling by Design, including the network planning and travel demands described above.

There are opportunities for planning authorities to specify and enforce these requirements to developers and contractors through the planning process via Local Development Plans and planning guidance. These can provide information on:

• the key points of connection to the wider cycle network
• any requirements for off-site cycle route improvements
• requirements for the on-site cycle network in line with Cycling by Design requirements
• requirements for other cycling infrastructure such as cycle parking.

Planning conditions can then be attached to successful planning applications relating to specific requirements of Cycling by Design, if these are linked back to local planning policy and the requirements of the Scottish Government’s Planning Circulars 4/1998 and 3/2012. If local planning policy, and any cycle network plan defined therein, establishes the need for cycle routes within or adjacent to the new development, then it may also be appropriate to seek developer contributions.

Smaller developments which fall below the normal thresholds to provide Transport Assessments should still be required to provide and/or contribute towards new and improved cycling infrastructure in line with local and national planning policy.

It is recommended that designers of new developments use the Design Review process that is set out in Section 2.8 to inform and support the planning and Road Construction Consent (RCC) applications for the development. This will allow the planning and RCC applications to be informed by key decisions from this Design Review.

Any failure to meet the requirements set by Cycling by Design will be identified in the Design Review for the development, and should be taken into account by the planning authority when determining planning permission. Such failures may also affect any funding being sought that relies on Cycling by Design compliance.

Design review

Meeting or exceeding the requirements set by this guidance will ensure that future cycling infrastructure provides a high level of service and is attractive to all potential cycle users, particularly new or less confident cycle users.

Clause	Description
2.8.1	The Design Review should be applied to all schemes, from inception of the design process, incorporating: Cycling infrastructure New and improved roads New developments Any other built environment feature where cycling should be considered.

Note: The Design Review is an essential part of the design of any scheme being developed in accordance with Cycling by Design.

The designer is encouraged to consider the design process and ask important questions at the outset.

Designers should ask:

• What is the project’s context and scope (e.g. a built-up area or remote setting), and what therefore might be a proportionate interpretation of the project objectives and design requirements?
• What does the surrounding transport network or network plan incorporate and how is this project expected to interact with these (e.g. could an alternative alignment avoid crossing a busy road)?
• What can be changed (e.g. traffic speeds and volumes, wider traffic circulation, land purchase) and what should be changed to create suitable conditions?
• Depending on the content and potential for change, what solutions (e.g. mixed traffic street) would be most suitable for achieving the required level of service for people cycling?
• What are the early and identifiable design constraints, and how could the level of service be best planned for to target and eliminate/mitigate for potential low level of service elements?
• What could the Overseeing Organisation be made aware of at an early stage that could improve the level of service metrics at design constraints and therefore support project objectives?

The Design Review is an opportunity for designers to demonstrate their design process and subsequently how the design has been optimised, meets the objectives of the scheme, and provides the highest attainable level of service in relation to the core design principles. It should be sensitive to the context of the design, and how this context affects the level of service provided by the design.

Collation of the Design Review from the outset and as the project develops can assist the designer in identifying challenges, opportunities, and identify appropriate solutions. The Design Review should be submitted to the Overseeing Organisation for consideration iteratively, and for approval when the design is finalised.

Where designers are unable to meet the requirements set by Cycling by Design, the Design Review will set out:

• The requirement(s) not able to be met
• The reasons why the requirement(s) are not able to be met and the attempts that have been made to do so, recognising the importance of providing a high level of service and the need to apply the Sustainable Travel Hierarchy
• The impact that falling below the design requirement will have on the project’s objectives
• The type of users, e.g. novice, intermediate etc., who could be excluded from the infrastructure as a result of falling below the requirement, and how this can be mitigated
• Any safety issues created for cycle users or other users and how this can be mitigated
• Any accessibility issues created for cycle users or other users and how this can be mitigated, in line with the ongoing Equality Impact Assessment for the project
• Recommendations for alternative actions that could be undertaken to enable these requirements to be met (such as land acquisition or the closure of the motor traffic lane) and who has the authority to implement these, as part of a holistic approach to delivering high-quality cycling infrastructure.

It is beneficial for the Overseeing Organisation to be consulted as the Design Review is developed. This can ensure shared understanding of objectives, and recognition of challenges. The Overseeing Organisation should consider the Design Review and either agree with its findings or request further consideration of the design to meet Cycling by Design requirements. 

Local road and trunk road authorities should involve each other in the design review process where cycling infrastructure may be designed on behalf of one but adopted and maintained by another.

The Design Review will form part of the Audit and Review process. When cycling infrastructure is being delivered as part of holistic street improvements, the Design Review process will form one element of the Quality Audit process that is required by Designing Streets (along with inputs from other disciplines and specialists as part of that holistic design).

Guidance is provided on the review and assessment of cycling infrastructure in DMRB GG 142 Walking, Cycling and Horse-Riding Assessment and Review. This is a requirement for trunk road schemes, and the principles of DMRB GG 142 can be applied to the Design Review of local projects.

The Place Standard tool provides a framework to allow designers to assess the impact of their design on the place quality of the surrounding environment. Although not a requirement of Cycling by Design, it is recommended that designers utilise the Place Standard tool to help inform the development of designs and during the Design Review process to help identify any impacts or improvements that can be made.

Road Safety Audits will continue to be undertaken independently of this Design Review process, as set out in DMRB GG 119.