Aalborg Universitet Bike Infrastructures Report Silva, Victor ... - VBN

The recommendations are divided in 3 sections which
represent the research packages developed in the project
Interventions to the Bicycle Infrastructure.
Bike Infrastructures
The results indicate that fast connectivity, attractive landscape
and safety – in this order of relevance – are strategic
dimensions of a design solution that must be taken in
consideration by architects, planners and engineers.
Statistic analysis re¬veals how the relationship between
age group and travel purpose can further enhance future
biking infrastructures, for example younger cyclists are
more likely to be travel¬ing to study or school, whereas
the older cyclists are trav¬eling to work. Therefore future
infrastructures could cater for this division creating faster,
safer and less congested bike lanes.
When deciding to implement or improve a bike infrastructure,
the particular qualities and potentials of different
bike typologies should be analyzed in order to decide
what kind of bike infrastructure would be appropriate to
be implemented.
Different typologies or a conjugation of typologies can be
ef¬ficiently used for commuting. Again, what seems to be
important is how fast the infrastructure connects the cyclists,
how attractive is the landscape and how safe it is to
ride a bike in the infrastructure.
National Survey
For the period 2010-2014 it is expected that more than
2 billion Danish kroner will be invested in bike-promoting
initiatives in Denmark. Some projects are inventive by
testing out new initiatives and the magnitude of projects
alone represents a golden opportunity to obtain valuable
knowledge upon the cycling effects of various bikepromoting
initiatives. This could significantly improve the
basis for the future prioritizing of bike-promoting projects.
Performing such evaluations requires that before/after
registrations on relevant parameters is performed.
The national questionnaire indicates that the municipalities
only to a limited extent perform before/after registrations
that allow scientifically based before-after studies of
effect to be performed. Consequently, it seems relevant to
build an incentive structure that ensures that the municipalities
make such registrations – especially when initiatives
with little or none existing documentation of effects
are implemented.
The national Cycling Fund holds promise of such an incentive
structure, as those receiving financial support
from the funds must make evaluations of the effects of
the supported projects. However, in this case it is highly
unfortunate that no systematic evaluation program/
scheme has been implemented. Setting up standards
for the evaluations would allow for comparison of effects
between projects and furthermore it would enable the application
of meta-analysis to uniform projects. The latter
would significantly improve the quality of the evaluations
and the estimates of the effects, making it possible to test
whether or not the effects are significant. Furthermore, it
also makes it possible to test, if the effects of given projects
are homogenous, thus producing knowledge reflecting
if the effects varies with local characteristics, project
details, geography etc.
Consequently, it can be recommended:
1. That an incentive structure for performing evaluations
of effects is implemented, e.g. by demanding that projects
which receive financial support from the government are
implemented, alike test projects requiring dispensation
from current legislation such as allowing right turn for cyclists
in the red-phase at signalized intersections.
2. That a systematic evaluation scheme is implemented
ensuring that meta-analysis can be applied in order to
estimate the likely effects of given treatments, the significance
of effect and the homogeneity of effects.
Consequently, it can be recommended:
1. That an incentive structure for performing evaluations
of effects is implemented, e.g. by demanding that projects
which receive financial support from the government are
implemented, alike test projects requiring dispensation
from current legislation such as allowing right turn for cyclists
in the red-phase at signalized intersections.
2. That a systematic evaluation scheme is implemented
ensuring that meta-analysis can be applied in order to
estimate the likely effects of given treatments, the significance
of effect and the homogeneity of effects.
Dutch References
From the Dutch experience and research a number of
recommendations can be given to other countries.
1. The promotion of bicycle use is only credible and successful
if cycling is a practical, relatively fast and convenient
mode of transport. We recommend the five main
requirements for planning and designing bicycle infrastructure
that are generally adopted by the Dutch professionals:
coherence, directness, attractiveness, safety,
and comfort.
2. Promotion of the bicycle should include improving the
perception of the conditions by (potential) cyclists. Improving
the perception of conditions results in increased
bicycle use beyond the increases associated with improving
the actual conditions.
3. Minimizing travel times between origins and destinations
is important in designing bicycle infrastructure. First,
the detours compared to crow-fly distances should be
small, implying a high density of the cycle network. Second,
the average speed that cyclists can achieve should
be high and delays at traffic lights and other bottlenecks
should be minimized, for instance by bicycle-friendly
phasing of traffic lights and giving right of way to cyclists
at intersections.
4. Urban bicycle routes should preferably be traced
through traffic restrained areas because cyclists prefer
undisturbed and convenient cycling conditions.
5. The Dutch studies give information about when segregation
of cycling facilities is preferable and when not.
There is an ongoing international debate on the usefulness
and need of segregated facilities. It is well known
that a certain type of (often masculine) assertive cyclist
activists, mainly in Anglo Saxon countries, challenge the
need of segregation, often with road safety arguments.
The lessons from the Dutch studies on this point are:
• Generally, segregation is preferred if there are large differences
between the speeds of the different road users
and traffic volumes are fairly high. In particular, off-road
bicycle paths are highly desirable for busy main roads,
both for safety reasons and undisturbed travelling. The
bicycle paths should be comfortable and have sufficient
capacity for uncongested cycling. In urban conditions,
two sided one directional cycle tracks are generally preferred
to one sided two directional tracks. Only when one
sided two directional tracks substantially reduce the need
to cross busy roads, should this be considered the best
solution.
• In the urban context bicycle and motorized modes can
be mixed on condition that traffic volume is not too high
and speeds are harmonized (i.e. car speeds are limited
to the speed of the bicycles). Bicycle streets and shared
space solutions are good examples of mixed facilities that
meet the quality requirements for cycling.
6. A good design of intersections is essential. Intersections
are the most important cause for delays and most
accidents where cyclists are involved happen at intersections.
Specific design elements such as table crossings
are recommended to accommodate safely the right
of way for cyclists. The ramps of these crossings should
be about 5 m from the edge of the cycle track so as to
promote a proper interaction between car drivers and cyclists.